Topic ^
We can all think of a million ideas/suggestions we would like to see added, but what do you guys think absolutely must be in the game for you to consider it done?
For me, it's the communication with nearby villages. One option for diplomacy seems empty and pointless, we need more meaningful communication options here. Right now it seems like a broken feature.
Everything now seems to be falling into place with the additon of animal taming.. But i agree with you and diplomacy lacks and i sometimes feel rather isolated in such a big world by the lack/ limited communication with other factions and colonies. Other than that its an amazing game filled to the brim with content. Thank you Tynan for this product. 8)
Hum...
Myself I would be at a loss to justify new features addition if...
- there was ~hundred of events.
- there was themed storytellers.
- there was some open Endings.
With the above, things like improved tech-tree or diplomacy would feel more optional than missing.
Rimworld Key strength is IMO replayability with different condition, so I would feel sad for missing that unique opportunity.
Quote from: Avarice on July 13, 2015, 06:19:17 PM
Topic ^
We can all think of a million ideas/suggestions we would like to see added, but what do you guys think absolutely must be in the game for you to consider it done?
For me, it's the communication with nearby villages. One option for diplomacy seems empty and pointless, we need more meaningful communication options here. Right now it seems like a broken feature.
Diplomacy agreed, as well as children(I could do without, but it's a colony!), content and bug fixes(more weapons, more random events, research options, etc, beta period basically) and I would be very happy.
Agree on faction diplomacy and interaction. That's number one on my list.
Specifically more ways for the relationship with a faction to degrade. It's pretty easy to make friends with everyone, I'd like that to be more dynamic.
The other thing on my list is a better ending and/or ways to prolong the game once you're 'done' with a map.
Nothing, of course. The creator of a game decides what the vision of the game is. He decides what the target is to be hit. If he hits that target by fulfilling all stated promises, the product is done. In RimWorld's case, we passed that already so I'm just adding bonus content here.
You can wish for more content in any game. You can criticize it for being too small, the same as any other criticism. But you can't arbitrarily decide whether it's 'done'.
It's the creator's right to decide what to create. It's the consumer's right to decide whether to buy it. Neither party has any right to take away the rights of the others. A creator can't force a consumer to buy his product (though many try). A consumer can't force a creator to make what they want (though many try). Neither has any moral obligation to accede to the other's wishes.
Saying otherwise essentially means that you think that the creator doesn't have a choice of what to make. It would mean that a creator is morally obligated to fulfil not his own vision, but that of other people, lest he be accused of 'abandoning' a game. But he isn't. You can't, from the outside, force moral obligations on someone like that. You can't erase a creator's vision and overwrite it with your own. That's not your right. Your right is to decide whether you want to buy what's presented.
I've seen this quite a bit these days for some reason. e.g I heard some people accusing the Banished creator of 'abandoning' his game. But Banished was never in early access, and no features were ever promised besides those in the final game, and every feature in the game was fully-rendered, and AFAIK what bugs were there were fixed in reasonable time. So how was it 'abandoned'? It wasn't - not at all. It's just a game that could have been a bigger game, but which the creator decided wouldn't be. You can criticize it and say it sucks, but you can't say it's unfinished or accuse the creator of 'abandoning' it. That's a personal charge of moral violation - something very different from criticism on quality.
It's like calling those short Pixar movies 'unfinished' because they're only a few minutes long, and they could be much longer. Maybe you wanted them to be longer. Maybe they could be longer. But they're not unfinished. They are what the creator decided they would be, and nobody else can steal that decision from a creator, because it's nobody's right to force a vision on the creator.
As for RimWorld, I'm adding more stuff and I'm happy to hear everyone's ideas of what to add. But there's no place here to state that the game isn't 'done' unless I do X. That presents it like an obligation I'm morally bound to undertake - but I'm not.
And also, just as a practical matter, if you look at this thread and others like it, everyone has their own personal wish list. Trying to do them all is infeasible. Which means that presenting these as "things that absolutely have to be in the game before I consider it done" essentially means I'm standing there in a circle of 100 people demanding I dance 100 different dances, each ready to denounce me as a 'game abandoner' if I don't satisfy their personal decision of what the game "absolutely" has to have. It's an impossible standard to satisfy, because it's based on the fallacy I described earlier.
I think this thread would be better cast as a general suggestions request thread.
I agree, unless they have promised features that are not in yet, or major bugs, it is done when the people making it say it is done.
I think a better way to word the topic would be something like "What would you like to see before Rimworld is done?"
I do have some ideas about diplomacy that I would like to see that I will be writing up and posting in suggestions section.
I feel like this would be a non-issue if OP had worded the topic title as "What do you guys think needs added to Rimworld for it to feel done?", since that's what's relevant from a consumer perspective.
Consumers want what consumers want. Any project released for money (a "product") is generally acknowledged as for the consumer- which is not to say the creator loses their creative rights, but it does open up the creator and their product to criticism, including criticisms concerning how complete the product feels. One consumer's opinion influences another's buying decision. It's been that way for a long time.
From there, it's simply a matter of the way people say things. For example, many things we say are opinions, but we don't place "in my opinion" in front of every applicable statement because it is needlessly formal/wordy/politically correct. In a similar manner, many people use "is" in cases that aren't necessarily literal. I could say "Pizza is disgusting" and (usually) everyone would realize that I'm not making a factual statement despite the use of "is".
What I'm getting at is that creators shouldn't take criticisms of their work so personally if they're presenting to the public. If it's for you alone, or if you don't like criticism, then it doesn't need to be presented to others. In other words, it shouldn't be a "product"; it should merely be a "creative work". When the creator happens to be a businessman, rather than getting offended at criticisms, I think it would be more beneficial to take criticisms and the voicing of opinions as information on what the consumers want. What said person does with that information is, of course, up to them.
The better-worded version:
1. A creator saying "this is/isn't finished" has a different meaning from a consumer saying "this is/isn't finished". The former refers to vision and the continuance of work on a creative work. The latter refers to consumer satisfaction with a product.
2. Creative works and products are two separate classes of projects with sometimes-contradictory elements. Some projects are only one or the other, but when a project is both, it inherits the attributes of both.
3. Though it is the right of a creator to create (an attribute of a "creative work"), it is the right of the consumer to judge (an attribute of a "product").
Thus:
4. When a project is both a creative work and a product, the consumer cannot force the creator to abandon his vision, but the creator cannot force the consumer to stop judging it either.
and
5. The best case scenario in said hybrid situation would be for the creator to only weigh the judgements of the consumer as heavily as the money that comes from the product. Some care about it more and some care about it less- neither perspective is necessarily wrong.
It's not about taking anything personally. It's about the nature of the criticism.
"Pizza is disgusting" is a statement about personal preference. "This pizza is disgusting" is just a statement about the quality of the product. "I was served an unfinished pizza" is a statement that the creator didn't do something he was obligated to do. It's an entirely different kind of criticism which by its very nature is aimed at the creator's moral standing. When you're served get a bad pizza you just walk away unhappy. When you're served an uncooked pizza you go to the kitchen and demand your money back.
SSS, where you are right is that sadly, in a lot of gaming discussions these days, people blur away the distinction between "this game isn't done" and "I wish this game had more content". They use one set of words when they mean the other (which I think is what everyone in this thread above so far did). But these mean two very different things. So I guess I'm just asking you guys not to blur away that distinction. If you're writing wish lists - say so! Because as I discussed in my last post, the alternative is infeasible and guaranteed to lead to charges of betrayal and abandonment in the end. I just want to stop those memes from proliferating before they start, and not become a victim of extremely imprecise language which eventually bleeds back into peoples' beliefs about the reality of what 'done' means.
What you're not taking into account, I think, is that there's a difference between a pizza and a painting: A pizza is usually a product. It is for the consumer through and through. On the other hand, a painting is usually a creative work. It is for the creator alone.
With a pizza, I can see whether it's baked or not. I can see whether the appropriate toppings are present. I can see if the crust is cracker-like and thin or bread-like and thick. I might like more or less cheese, different styles, and so on. Whether the pizza is finished or complete depends entirely on what I want. I might even want an unbaked pizza. The level of completeness is entirely up to me, the consumer, because the pizza is a product. It's created for me.
However, with a painting, it doesn't matter what I think unless the creator wants to know. Whether the strokes or big or small; whether it takes up the whole canvas, half of it, or a small portion; whether a small or large number of colors are used; the creator decides what is right or wrong, and at what point it is complete, because it is a creative work. It's created for the creator.
Thus, we have two unique forms of completeness, that that is decided by the consumer, and that that is decided by the creator. What is complete to the creator and what is complete to the consumer are potentially two different things. Thus, when you have something that is both a creative work and a product, you have two different meanings behind "complete". A project can be complete as a creative work (the creator's decision) and incomplete as a product (the consumer's decision), or vice versa.
These decisions are both within their respective party's rights.
I think this 'product/creative work' distinction is incoherent and not useful.
From one side: RimWorld is a product created for all of you. I'm not faffing about with my own 'artistic' impulses doing what I want and then you all just happen to like it. I do what I think will work well and please players. I make promises and then work to fulfil them.
And even in the most 'creative' works, creators are bound to their promises. A painter commissioned to do a portrait won't get paid if they only do half the canvas. They agreed to do a portrait of a certain size, and that is the standard of 'done'.
From the other side: "Whether the pizza is finished or complete depends entirely on what I want." simply isn't true. Whether the pizza is finished depends on whether it matches what you ordered. If the shop advertises a pepperoni pizza, and you order it, you can't just decide while it's cooking it that it absolutely must have anchovies on it as well, otherwise it's unfinished. The same goes if you want anchovies in your head, but they don't offer it, so you order a pepperoni. They promised you a pepperoni pizza, and that's what you'll get, and it'll be done. You have no recourse to complain over the lack of anchovies because that was never agreed upon, just as you have no resource to complain over Banished not having combat because that was never promised (just an example).
In either case, the definition of 'done' is the same: whether the product matches what the creator promised. The nature of the work is irrelevant.
But many games are actually abandoned and unfinished, if we didn't had money grappers at first place we wouldn't yelling "UNFINISHED GAME" at first place. In the case of Banished, I think people said more about it's boring and repetitive, which is true, if it wasn't boring and repetitive people wouldn't said unfinished neither.(also you can't tell me what to say. tynan is reincarnation of Hitler.)
Also what people expected is world simulator, where every single pawn has personality, legacy, who killed who and there should be hundred of colonies and millions of people, and you should able to invade and slaughter them all or start as a adventurer and visit ruined colonies, join pirate and plunder or whatever you want. It might be "finished" in developers sight but to people, it just another incomplete DF clone. ("RimWorld - basically the sci-fi Dwarf Fortress" - Tynan - http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131168.0)
Current game is fun, but I wouldn't say it's "Complete", "Work of art" or "Near Perfection", in other word, game will never completed until tynan die.
You turned the painting into a product by having it be bought. I used paintings as an example of a creative work because they often are not sold. Once it's being sold, it's a product (whether or not it is also a creative work) and contains the product type of completeness.
A project can be more for oneself or more for others. The importance of the creator's decision versus the consumer's decision only depends on how much the money matters, and even beyond that, (to digress for a moment) I don't think neglecting to fully please the consumer necessarily implies a moral breach on the part of the product provider. If I order a pepperoni pizza and it is a couple pepperonis short of what I would like and is a bit skimpy on the cheese, that doesn't mean the product provider did something morally wrong (unless they knowingly tried to cheat the consumer). It's only wrong if the content provider grossly failed at providing what was promised.
This is why I tried to make it clear in a recent conversation of ours that I am not trying to vilify you nor demand a refund.
To come back on point, you are correct when you say a product must only meet what was ordered. I indeed can't demand anchovies if I didn't order them. Nor should I complain that the pizza was baked if I didn't specify that I didn't want it baked. This is why what the consumer is getting needs to be made as abundantly clear as possible before they buy the product. When it isn't made clear enough, there comes a disagreement over the completeness of the product betwixt the consumer and product provider.
To apply it to our situation:
If Rimworld is indeed complete as a product (even though it may not be as a creative work, since you want to continue working on it), then why is it still being presented as an alpha on the main Rimworld page? Why not do a full release on Steam?: The answer is that you may work a lot more on the game (i.e. until the game is complete as a creative work). However, you're saying that that content is a "bonus" or "more than the full release" (product-wise), not the full release. By continuing to present Rimworld as an alpha, you're leading consumers to believe Rimworld is an incomplete product, which then affects the consumer's idea of what is promised. It is "more"- an undefined "more", but a "more" nonetheless. By refraining from defining that "more" and deciding as you go along, you cause your consumers to do the same. Thus you've placed yourself in an impossible situation until either (a) the game is officially and in advertisement presented as complete or (b) you define the "more" so that consumers have no room to claim the final product isn't actually a complete product (regardless as to whether it is as a creative work).
By leaving everything is such a state, you're potentially creating more and more consumers who feel they haven't been given a complete product, not due to malignant intent or lack of responsibility on your part, but due to a poor representation of what is promised.
In short: What the product provider is promising needs to be made abundantly clear in all avenues.
Edit: You see, I actually have a very different idea of what Rimworld is supposed to be when it is complete when compared to Aristocat, many others in this thread, and most likely you. This isn't because everyone is being unreasonable; it's because we haven't been given a clear idea of what Rimworld is supposed to be, which is actually your responsibility.
Indeed. People will make assumptions about the future based on alpha status alone. They're wrong to do so, but they will do it. I'd say as a marketing strategic analysis, SSS you're spot-on with your concerns. I wouldn't say that this means that alpha status implies that anything is actually promised in particular. It's the difference between "what is a good business decision", "what will people assume", and "what are your actual obligations".
I do wish I could provide a precise roadmap of what will go into the game and when it'll be done. That would be amazing. I just can't because I don't know! So I'm sort of stuck with a game where I know I want to add more stuff, but I really have no idea how much or how long it'll take. I'm not willing to take the huge risk of guessing what'll go in and promising it to everyone; I've been wrong in my predictions way, way too often. So that leaves us here, with people assuming all sorts of future paths, and me constantly trying to manage those unjustified expectations towards something more realistic. I guess this is pretty much the steady state of it; I don't really see a strategic pivot that would solve these problems without creating worse ones.
I'm seeing this with other games too. e.g the No Man's Sky guys seem to already know that they're going to get boned by people's self-assumed expectations of their game. It must be brutal. It's like what happened in this thread times a hundred.
I can see where you're coming from about the roadmap, and I actually think the lack of one makes this more fun even for the consumers, to a degree. It's just that I don't think you did a very good job presenting the game to someone who hasn't bought it yet:
I think making it clear on the main page that you consider Rimworld feature-complete despite being in alpha, or expressly disowning any implications given the status as an alpha would solve virtually everything. It's important that it's on the main rimworldgame page though, since that's where the new/potential consumers are. It doesn't mean much if you don't find out until after you've bought.
I don't think I would be saying anything (or nearly as much) if that was the case when I bought Rimworld. That part of the risk, that there are no expressed or implied promises, would have been presented up-front and the only person I could blame is myself.
Alpha status is just something that people tend to take as an implied promise even if nothing is explicitly promised. By disowning any implications before someone buys, it could save you a lot of unfavorable claims. There's just no argument left.
I like the consideration going in to this right now, a lot of good talks so I'll throw in my 2 cents.
I honestly feel that for a survival game sanitation and water are important factor.
I mean you could start out with digging a well and building an outhouse all the way to water pumps, water pipes, and tanks (like power cable, batteries, and generators) and septic tanks and toilets for colonists. It would go along with food needs and with water already being on the map I feel it's out of place to not have some water mechanic.
When I read the topic title my first thought was "guys, please leave it, let Tynan get on with it and add what he feels like, he has a plan trust him", but i felt posting that would just turn this into what the thread eventually became anyway.
My thoughts on this are inline with Tynans, his point about "in a lot of gaming discussions these days, people blur away the distinction between "this game isn't done" and "I wish this game had more content"." is exactly what i feel started this thread. (apologies if im wrong)
After reading all this and from past experience I just wanted to add a voice to what i feel is (you may disagree) the majority, in that most people think in line with Tynan and are happy to let him continue as he is until he feels its done.
My last point is one I always make but i dont feel is necessarily important here as I feel Tynan is a level headed guy, but in the past when ive seen devs swamped like this with "your games not done" etc...theyve just gone and released it as its not no longer fun for them due to all the criticism. Simply put, dont poke the bear. (Tynan youre now a bear, sorry).
One feature I'd like to see, is the ability to wander off and visit other colonies. Either to trade, or raid, loot and kidnap there woman and children.
That feature as a base feature would also open up a whole new world of modding opportunities.
As it currently stands, I haven't managed to find a game with even nearly as much depth as this.
The biggest problem with having something awesome, is that you just want more :p
Amen SSS.
Alpha is defined as a game that is still in development, and that more content will be added. By calling it rimworld alpha XX, you are stating that the program is incomplete. Consumers make purchasing decisions upon the information given. You are giving the consumer the information right away, that the game is not DONE, not complete.
Yet you have announced that for you it is DONE. That is a violation of the moral obligation with the consumers since Rimworld is still an Alpha release. That is where the backlash towards you is coming from, you have violated the obligation that you sold to the consumer from the very title of the game.
Want to call the game done, that is your right as the creator, but it is also your moral obligation to label your product correctly.
I thought this was an innocent question looking to discuss features, phrased around concepts introduced in the dev blog and A11 preview video.
I think I must have missed something somewhere. I'm wondering about the thread that stemmed from the Steam dev blog announcement.
Quote from: TLHeart on July 14, 2015, 03:13:55 AM
Amen SSS.
Alpha is defined as a game that is still in development, and that more content will be added. By calling it rimworld alpha XX, you are stating that the program is incomplete. Consumers make purchasing decisions upon the information given. You are giving the consumer the information right away, that the game is not DONE, not complete.
Yet you have announced that for you it is DONE. That is a violation of the moral obligation with the consumers since Rimworld is still an Alpha release. That is where the backlash towards you is coming from, you have violated the obligation that you sold to the consumer from the very title of the game.
Want to call the game done, that is your right as the creator, but it is also your moral obligation to label your product correctly.
Tynan stated it has enough content in his mind to be labelled as done, not that it is done. If it was done im sure hed remove the alpha moniker and throw out 1.0.
An exploration / mission / scouting / spelunking feature.. Essentially taking x colonists for tasks on areas of the world outside the base. Ie deep mines or assaulting back enemy bases
I don't think anything is needed, but what would increase enjoyment the most for me would be a large range of events, differentiated across biomes/other variables. As it stands the events across biomes feel fairly cut and paste.
Following that, I'd like to see the distance to final tech extend quite a bit. Superior Crafting does this already so its hardly mandatory, but I think vanilla would benefit quite a bit from this as it would delay the "stasis" point in base building.
Finally, new mechanics would be great - water, z-levels, FOW - although I think most of these are highly unlikely except in a sequel/expansion (if then even). I think the best return on dev time is in the first two points above.
A number of people have stated that they're having trouble seeing RimWorld as complete because it lacks several mechanics etc necessary for a survival game.
RimWorld is not a survival game.
RimWorld is a storytelling game where drama and characterization are the most important things. Crash landing on a hostile planet is just the theme through which the story is told. The promised product is story telling and drama, and RimWorld delivers. Yes, I too wish for more content, but Tynan has already delivered what he promised.
Quote from: TLHeart on July 14, 2015, 03:13:55 AM
Amen SSS.
Alpha is defined as a game that is still in development, and that more content will be added. By calling it rimworld alpha XX, you are stating that the program is incomplete. Consumers make purchasing decisions upon the information given. You are giving the consumer the information right away, that the game is not DONE, not complete.
Yet you have announced that for you it is DONE. That is a violation of the moral obligation with the consumers since Rimworld is still an Alpha release. That is where the backlash towards you is coming from, you have violated the obligation that you sold to the consumer from the very title of the game.
Want to call the game done, that is your right as the creator, but it is also your moral obligation to label your product correctly.
My personal issue with this is to what extent can a player expect an alpha game to grow? If I bought it at alpha 1, I can understand a bit of expectation. But what if someone buys it at alpha 12 and Tynan releases it as complete at the next stage, only adding a few things? Were they deceived? Not really IMO, because being in alpha doesn't mean something in particular is being added, only that it is still a work in progress. At any moment, an alpha can stop being an alpha. When some people buy an alpha, they look at how it is and gamble that it will become what they expect. Most people buy the game because it looks enjoyable how it is and want to play it. The issue Tynan is having is that those few people are feeling like they lost that gamble and are blaming Tynan. You don't lose money in the stock market because a company didn't do well, you lose money because you put money in the stock market.
As for deceiving the buyers by leaving it in Alpha, thats bollocks. It would be if Tynan wasn't still adding stuff to it, but the changelog obviously shows that isn't the case. Even then, there has to be one alpha that becomes the next stage. Alpha is also, after all, for testing a product with a smaller group before releasing it to a larger audience. All he is saying is if this was the last alpha, he would feel like he gave people a well rounded product, which he did.
Im not too fussed over wether people think the games finished or not. I like it as i is. I think it has huge potential, and im glad tynan takes our sugestions in acount in his development of the game. This is the first game ive ever played where ive had that, and i like it. I try to add my little bits in. If tynan released the game tommorow and said its gone, id still say it an excelant game, id just be slightly disapointed for that more that could be added. But i love the direction the games going, and while this feels more like a finished and whole game than most ive played on pc, id still like that little more. When tynan says its done, ill feel its done. Maybe there was more he could do, and maybe there was more potential there. But that dosent change the fact that this is an excellant game as is, and is well worthy to be called complete.
I think the original question of this thread might have been better stated as 'if you were the Dev' what would it take for you to consider it done.
Personally I think its all there. Maybe a few features fleshed out more but my $:FUN ratio has already been met and then some. Whatever obligations Tynan had with HIS game he has met. So at this point its about what he wants to do moving forward. A break to rest and not get burned out is his prerogative. Adding more updates is something he should do because he thinks its a cool idea. Not because other people told him too.
Want something else? ask or become a modder. I think we can all come up with a list of things we want to see in the game. Maybe he will do them, maybe a modder will.
My motivation for participating here were simple.
Right now the game is labeled and sold as an Alpha and player return (aka Alpha testing) help development. So even if I know Tynan is torn about releasing it on Steam as 'finished', I and other are still within rational reason to discuss what we think would make Rimworld to be considered by other (following our purely subjective view) as 'done'.
I'm sorry Tynan if it feel like a pressure because this is not and cannot be, as you checked and made it known yourself, you are under no contractual obligation to add more beside your interpretation of the Kickstarter's goal.
Anyway, even big conventional-game are sometime reviewed as 'clearly unfinished' despite the legal status of the game.
STALKER : Shadow of Chernobyl for example, a wonderful and immersive game... is known as incomplete and mods were created to add the feature that were planned, coded but never fully activated or integrated.
Just to say that status like 'Done' and 'Finished' are subjective in essences.
You could have marketed a "Pong game" game and delivered an exact copy of the original Pong game, people could still say it lack a filter to make it look like an old CRT display, or make it an Arcade-game within a VR space.
Quote from: Tynan on July 14, 2015, 02:20:10 AM
Indeed. People will make assumptions about the future based on alpha status alone. They're wrong to do so, but they will do it. I'd say as a marketing strategic analysis, SSS you're spot-on with your concerns. I wouldn't say that this means that alpha status implies that anything is actually promised in particular. It's the difference between "what is a good business decision", "what will people assume", and "what are your actual obligations".
People generally make assumptions in the absence of complete information. Since you can't know everything about a game until you actually play it such assumptions are inevitable. However, these assumptions are not made in a vacuum, but shaped in part by how it is presented and in part by how it compares to similar games.
By calling it an Alpha you essentially tell people that the game will receive significant content additions until such a time that it can be considered complete. What a complete game entails isn't exactly defined but it is generally assumed that all the important features of the genre are there, that there is a sufficient amount of polish and content, that all the features are properly fleshed out and integrated. Now where exactly these marks lie is where assumptions come in.
Let's look at how Rimworld presents itself: it is advertised as a sci-fi colony sim inspired thematically by Firefly and the "deep simulation" of Dwarf Fortress. Now that last part already carries a lot of implications with it, because it implies that the game will have a similar depth and scope as Dwarf Fortress, with similar features, etc. This is reinforced by the price point of $30, twice the price of normal indie games. By charging this much you basically imply your game delivers twice the value of a normal indie game, meaning more features and more content, not just some kind of "DF lite".
As of right now Rimworld might have enough value to be on par with other indie games, but it is certainly far from the depth of Dwarf Fortress. This might be in part due to the difference in development time but even so I think the difference is too big for the price point. Additionally there are a number of features that are poorly fleshed out, such as faction relations. They are barely present and not integrated into general gameplay. You might point out that it was never established how extensive these features were going to be exactly, but nevertheless the expectation was there and it stemmed mostly from comparison to other games where you generally don't see such poorly implemented mechanics. Furthermore, again comparing to other games the overall amount of content seems poor.
You can point out that you never "promised" this or that and that these expectations are all subjective and you'd be right, but that doesn't make them invalid. Since you never provided a detailed road-map with all the features exactly laid out people had to fill in the gaps themselves using information you provided them. Of course that doesn't mean every crazy feature request has to be fulfilled but there is such a thing as reasonable expectations and a product can and should be judged by how it lives up to them, even though the exact parameters are subjective.
Additionally I find it very rude and disrespectful of you to tell people they are wrong for making their assumptions. They are making them because they lack information and the fact they are willing to make business transactions based on them is what enabled you in the first place. When people backed your Kickstarter they did so with only a vague description of what the finished game might be and whatever assumptions they drew from it. Had they acted in the way you recommend nobody would have backed it because what you offered back then was not worth that kind of money. Yet now you stand here and scold people for making supposedly bad decisions you yourself enticed them to make.
I don't talk much on these forums. Not because there is nothing to talk about. In fact just the opposite. I just keep my mouth shut unless there is something missing that must be said> my own prerogative.
I been here since alpha 7. not a long time for some but long enough to know what is going on and most of all what I dont know.
I been a Pc gamer since I was 5, but did not have anything under my belt till the herald of fps "Doom" took its throne back in the early 90's
My point:I have a theory of what is going on here and why Tynan is upset(figuratively rather then literally) but also the other spectrum of why people are rather then making a suggestion but rather
Quote from: Tynan on July 14, 2015, 02:20:10 AM
Indeed. People will make assumptions about the future based on alpha status alone. They're wrong to do so, but they will do it.
Indeed..
This is why im bringing up the other part/field of view/ or rather the assuming what may or may not happen.
:Fear:This is a great game. beyond the scope many could hope for and dream of. The many years of pc gaming i have done and never seen a game like this.
Before there is interjection, there is dwarf fortress. I'm aware of this game, and like most who feverishly play rim world that knew of DF had tried there hand at that game. Some figured it out. Many do not or did not have the time to do so. This is not a crime but rather just a educated guess. (not based on any statistics) Back on point: This game made by Tynan is
arguably the first of its kind. Not the game itself but its user friendliness. From the mods to the game style to its underlying approach to simplicity yet as deep as any abyss.
I don't simply like this game. I can honestly say as it is now this is a game that 10 years down the road I would be surfing the forums trying to find a fix because my operating system is to much for this old game. Im sure some of you have come across games in where u have to get dos box or other work a around to get the ol floppy games to work.
This is that game. one of few that will last.
So where does the FEAR play into this?
Because this game is as great is it is? Or perhaps Its because it is still being worked on? A bit of both... Indeed this is interesting, a game like this and still in alpha. So much to do and being worked on. Tynan has inspirations, wish lists and his own in visioning that this game can and still could have.
So this makes people(some) afraid.
Belive it or not there are people right now in these forums who only been gaming since the early to mid Y2000.
Thnx to early access and other political bs these new comers don't know or simply not used to the concept of the old school alpha. A game that dose not go into beta or "release" till its feature complete (decided from the devs & publishers)
Conclusion: This is a new thing for many to conceive. The fear is derived from the fact that Tynan can and by all right could say..
Rimworld is done Especialy from the state of games today that are released and are not even finished or forbid... functional.
So assumptions are going to be rampant if they are not already. either by the ill informed, by fear, or simply entitlement. Its going to happen. it can be innocent or it could be a direct attack. But it all grounds to the fact that this is an epic game and any and all assumptions, predictions, suggestions, wishes.. its all based on complimenting the game.
For the few, soon to be many once this game goes to steam. its almost incomprehensible that a game as well made and continuing to be "made" as Rimworld is, to still be in alpha.
I salute you Tynan for understanding and willing to continue your great work in whatever form it may take.
:::This is in no way to describe the OP or topic just a simple observation:::
Thank you very much for all the replies everyone :)
Quote from: NoImageAvailable on July 14, 2015, 11:42:07 AM
comparing to other games the overall amount of content seems poor.
Which other games? Not Towns, Gnomoria, Clockwork Empires, Timber and Stone, Stonehearth, Spacebase DF-9. I think there's literally
one game for which that is the case, which is Dwarf Fortress, which has no graphics, 12 years of dev time behind it, and is saturated with thousands of bugs. You're essentially setting the standard that, because I said RW was inspired by DF, I'm now obligated to match the content depth of DF. That's not a reasonable expectation.
QuoteSince you never provided a detailed road-map with all the features exactly laid out people had to fill in the gaps themselves using information you provided them.
No, they really didn't
have to fill in anything. They could just look at the game as it is, and buy it if they want what they see at the price offered. Nobody is forced to make deep assumptions about future developments. And in fact I've always discouraged this sort of assumption-making.
In fact, I'd say one of the consumer's responsibilities is not to do this. Otherwise, again, you're essentially saying the creator doesn't have a choice of what to make - he has to make whatever people assume of him. As I said before, nobody has any right to force a moral obligation on someone like that, and even if they did, it's insensible considering that thousands of players assume thousands of different things. It's the creator's choice of what to make; it's the consumer's choice of whether to buy it.
Quote from: Tynan on July 14, 2015, 12:24:23 PM
Thank you very much for all the replies everyone :)
Quote from: NoImageAvailable on July 14, 2015, 11:42:07 AM
comparing to other games the overall amount of content seems poor.
Which other games? Not Towns, Gnomoria, Clockwork Empires, Timber and Stone, Stonehearth, Spacebase DF-9. I think there's literally one game for which that is the case, which is Dwarf Fortress, which has no graphics, 12 years of dev time behind it, and is saturated with thousands of bugs. You're essentially setting the standard that, because I said RW was inspired by DF, I'm now obligated to match the content depth of DF. That's not a reasonable expectation.
From a consumers point of view, based upon the marketing that has been provided, that is a reasonable expectation from a consumer. Add in the price point of 2 to 3 times of other indie alpha games, and that reinforces the expectation... The developer sets the expectations via marketing. Consumers never purchase an alpha game for the current content or state of playability. The expectation is there will be more, as it is an alpha game.
Quote
QuoteSince you never provided a detailed road-map with all the features exactly laid out people had to fill in the gaps themselves using information you provided them.
No, they really didn't have to fill in anything. They could just look at the game as it is, and buy it if they want what they see at the price offered. Nobody is forced to make deep assumptions about future developments. And in fact I've always discouraged this sort of assumption-making.
In fact, I'd say one of the consumer's responsibilities is not to do this.
NO you do not get to tell the consumer what their responsibility is. Can not have it both ways, that you get to tell the consumer their responsibility, but the consumer can not tell the developer what his responsibility is.
Quote
Otherwise, again, you're essentially saying the creator doesn't have a choice of what to make - he has to make whatever people assume of him. As I said before, nobody has any right to force a moral obligation on someone like that, and even if they did, it's insensible considering that thousands of players assume thousands of different things. It's the creator's choice of what to make; it's the consumer's choice of whether to buy it.
The developer has the choice of what to make, but also locks himself into the box of expectations from the marketing, he provides to the consumer. Once a developer starts to market a product, he is locked into the marketing he is providing. At that point, the developer no longer has the say of what he produces, as he is bound to meet the expectations he has set via the marketing.
The consumer makes their choice, from the marketing of the game, not from the assumptions the developer is imposing on the consumer.
Quoted from the front page,
" Inspired by the space western vibe of Firefly, the deep simulation of Dwarf Fortress, and the epic scale of Dune and Warhammer 40,000. "
That is the marketing that sets the consumers expectations very high. And the consumer has every right to expect those marketing statements to be achieved.
Many great products have gone down in flames due to bad marketing. Many bad products succeed due to great marketing.
"Inspired by". What dont you get about those words? It does not state it will be doing that in this game only that its inspired by it...I for one didnt think this game was going to be anywhere near as deep as DF but still bought it. That sentence does not set any kind of standard and youve proven the standard you think is there has been set by yourself and no one else and backed up Tynans statement above.
Quote from: Tynan on July 14, 2015, 12:24:23 PM
Which other games? Not Towns, Gnomoria, Clockwork Empires, Timber and Stone, Stonehearth, Spacebase DF-9. I think there's literally one game for which that is the case, which is Dwarf Fortress, which has no graphics, 12 years of dev time behind it, and is saturated with thousands of bugs. You're essentially setting the standard that, because I said RW was inspired by DF, I'm now obligated to match the content depth of DF. That's not a reasonable expectation.
I'm not saying "inspired by Dwarf Fortress" means it must have all the features that DF has. Rather it sets the expectations in terms of direction. So it would be reasonable to expect the game to include in-depth colonist simulation with character traits, psychology and relationship but not say, a CKII style diplomacy system. Expectations for content depth are set by the price, i.e. you expect a different amount of content from a $10 game than a $30 game.
Since you brought it up, let's take a look at Spacebase DF-9 for example. I'd say it has slightly less content depth than Rimworld and moderately less polish (at least it did in the last Alpha build, I haven't played the full release yet) at only a third the price of Rimworld. Coincidentally it is also a prime example of an unfinished game, where the developers one day announced that they ran out of money and are stopping development. Had they implemented all the planned features it would easily match Rimworld in content.
QuoteIn fact, I'd say one of the consumer's responsibilities is not to do this. Otherwise, again, you're essentially saying the creator doesn't have a choice of what to make - he has to make whatever people assume of him. As I said before, nobody has any right to force a moral obligation on someone like that, and even if they did, it's insensible considering that thousands of players assume thousands of different things. It's the creator's choice of what to make; it's the consumer's choice of whether to buy it.
That is extremely cautious purchasing behavior you're advocating yet it is not viable in practice. Again, Rimworld wouldn't exist if people followed your advise because at the time of the campaign
there was no game to buy. The only thing people had to go on was a concept and a number of promises and they formed expectations about how the game would most likely look like in the end and whether it was worth the risk of purchase. And you have an obligation to deliver a product that conforms to these expectations (within reason of course) because you took their money for that specific purpose.
Someone brought up an example of how a painter cannot leave a portrait with a half-painted canvas. He could with something he painted on his own time, but not the portrait because someone commissioned him and paid him money for it. And even though it was never specified what percentage of the canvas must be filled he still has to fill it all because there is an established standard of reasonable expectation and it is valid even if it is left unspoken.
The same thing happened here, the people on Kickstarter didn't throw money at you to do with as you please, they essentially commissioned you to make a game for them and while they couldn't see exactly what the finished product will look like there is still an obligation for it to conform to a certain standard. Did they take a risk when they paid you? Yes. Tomorrow you could be hit by a bus same as the artist painting a portrait, but that does not relieve you of your responsibility.
And frankly, you deriving those peoples' decisions seems very dishonest considering you built your business on them. You're essentially saying all those Kickstarter backers were wrong to place their trust in you, that their business decisions were all terrible and wrong and that you always cautioned against it
and yet you built your entire studio off of those decisions and actively asked people to act in ways you call irresponsible.
You didnt pay for anything, you kickstarted, commission doesnt come into it, thats a very bad analogy.
That's the point I've been trying to drive though, Tynan. You aren't just a creator; you are also a product provider, and a product provider indeed does not have a choice in what to make: They have to make what they present (both explicitly and by implication) to the consumer. As a creator you are accountable to yourself alone, but as a product provider to are accountable to your customers. That is why the manner in which you present your product is so important.
Note that in this conversation I haven't brought up how much content should be present in Rimworld. That is because it is your responsibility as a product provider to set that expectation: If you cannot do so, you need to make the consumer aware of that before they buy, not after.
Why would you intentionally allow consumers to make a bad buying decision on your product when you could easily correct it? If you aren't making any implications when you advertise the game as being in alpha state, and if you aren't making any implications about what the final product will look like, you need to explicitly state that to the consumer before they buy.
From my perspective:
Dwarf Fortress is a colossal pain in the ass to try to play. Rimworld may have a learning curve, but I actually understand what I am doing, and why things happen. IMO Dwarf Fortress went too far, too deep, it practically turned into one of those diehard flight sims where you can't even get off the ground unless you're actually certified to fly that plane. I might wish for a little more detail in Rimworld, but there's a balance to be had. Tynan is comfortable with it like this. Abrexus pushed it deeper in Superior Crafting. Both are perfectly valid and coexist peacefully.
I never saw the Kickstarter. I learned about this game in alpha 9 because Miss Jamball was playing it on Twitch. I made my choice as to whether it was worth $30 based on how much fun it seemed to be. I assumed that it would gain additional features, which it did, but I wasn't expecting it to turn into something drastically larger. I was a bit surprised when Tynan said it was done, but it's also kinda a matter of semantics and marketing. There IS a perceived difference between an early access game and a finished game that's getting bonus content. Remember that Tynan was planning to put it on Steam as a full release and changed his mind based on feedback since he wanted to take a break. "Done" doesn't mean "set in stone". Terraria got two major patches like a year after the game was "done" because the developer felt like it. Blizzard did a massive rebalace of Diablo 2 out of nowhere like three years after it released.
I think that Tynan has been clear both that he considers Rimworld to be functional as a complete game as it is now, and that he still has ideas for more things to do with it. The reason it's not 1.0 is because that's supposed to be the Steam release, which WAS going to be now, but got delayed. As a result we might end up with an alpha 12, or 1.0 might still be the next version.
The way I look at things is entertainment hours per dollar. No matter how much something may cost, what did you get out of it? When you put things side by side, even at $30 a game like Rimworld beats out a $60 triple-A title that lasts 10 hours, or a $12 movie ticket for a 2 hour film. I've played Rimworld for probably close to 120 hours, and I know that's not even remotely impressive.
It's also worth noting that Rimworld has mods. Once Tynan stops rearranging the guts of the game, modders can tweak to their heart's content.
Heh, now y'all got me thinking of the good ol' days when full development houses released games that were actually, unplayably, unfinished and you had to call them up so they could mail you a patch disk so you could win the game. Or maybe play it at all without crashes/horrible balance. :)
I have played Rimworld at my friends house and was considering buying it now for myself. I saw it lacks features/systems, like water, children, tech tree, interaction, so on, and wasn't very deep but I liked its potential and I thought since it was mid to late alpha and still had to go into beta and 1.0 that those blank spaces would be filled in and meanwhile I could buy it now and play it and enjoy it while I wait and watch it develop. I was especially encouraged by the advertising that said it would have the deep emergent gameplay similar to Dwarf Fortress.
I wouldn't be happy to pay 30 dollars for the game in its current state. Maybe 10-15. I would've been happy to pay 30 to support a real alpha that would turn into a complete game one day.
Then I see that the game according to Tynan is finished and anything more is extra, handouts, that buyers are not entitled to.
No thanks. I will just share the game my friend has. If its ever complete and I think its worth whatever its being sold for then maybe Ill get it. But this is one game I wont be supporting in early access alpha because apparently its not a real alpha.
Quote from: KC on July 15, 2015, 12:14:05 AM
I was especially encouraged by the advertising that said it would have the deep emergent gameplay similar to Dwarf Fortress.
umm no that doesnt exist, youre making it up.
Quote from: skullywag on July 15, 2015, 02:03:25 AM
Quote from: KC on July 15, 2015, 12:14:05 AM
I was especially encouraged by the advertising that said it would have the deep emergent gameplay similar to Dwarf Fortress.
umm no that doesnt exist, youre making it up.
While I enjoy the game fine as is, it isn't difficult to understand why someone would think the above.
("RimWorld - basically the sci-fi Dwarf Fortress" - Tynan - http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131168.0)
Quote from: akiceabear on July 15, 2015, 03:07:54 AM
Quote from: skullywag on July 15, 2015, 02:03:25 AM
Quote from: KC on July 15, 2015, 12:14:05 AM
I was especially encouraged by the advertising that said it would have the deep emergent gameplay similar to Dwarf Fortress.
umm no that doesnt exist, youre making it up.
While I enjoy the game fine as is, it isn't difficult to understand why someone would think the above.
("RimWorld - basically the sci-fi Dwarf Fortress" - Tynan - http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=131168.0)
You quoted my post without my name! I'm going to sue you.
Quote from: Tynan on July 13, 2015, 10:30:56 PM
Lots of things...
Yikes!
I want to say first off, this is one of my top 3 favorite games along with terraria and zomboid.
I didn't intend for this post to be a "what Tynan must do!" kind of topic.
As another poster suggested, it's more of a what does everyone "feel" needs to be added for them "personally" to think the game is complete. The word "considered" in the topic should of covered that, if you want a semantic argument.
Everyone indeed has their own ideas of what that may or may not be, which is why I thought it would be a good topic for general discussion, and not so much a suggestion/wish list thread.
I brought up diplomacy specifically because it's already in the game, but is heavily lacking in my opinion. A few additional options for dealing with other villagers would flesh that feature out and the game as a whole would seem complete to me based on what's already in the game, not features I wish were in there.
That's the distinction, judging the game based on what's there, not what I wish was there.
Sorry if I upset anyone with the post, I was just excited to see the progress done with the game and hearing it was pretty much considered done, barring future content that may be added, thought I'd post and see what everyone else thought.
Again, sorry for any misunderstanding, and I love this game guys. If nothing else ever gets added I'd still be playing it and be happy I helped support it.
If you still think the topic needs moved to the suggestion forums, feel free.
Tynan, you do need a vacation man. Relax. :)
Also, when this game goes to Steam, you should avoid ever visiting their forums if my harmless post here struck a nerve, they will eat you alive.
A system for colonists to explore other areas outside the base. Used for turning the tables and BEING raiders on other world patts, potential migration, exploring underground mines, or assaulting anything else. I think pairing this with things like packed supplies and fog of war could make for very interesting, xcom like experiences, which the combat system was initially inspired by, somewhat. And the risk of losing 3 or 4 colonists catastrophically / being down men for a week could be balanced by huge rewards.
Also feel this could really pad the game out with quests for items for ship parts, unique events, ect, and could make for tough choices, like do you take 6 of an 8 person colony on mission, leaving a skeleton crew? Split even? Or send only a couple scouts?
Granted managing 2 scenarios at once on 2 maps is odd, but could be done
This could have been a very useful and interesting topic. Bit of a shame that it got caught up in other things. On a related note though I strongly agree with Avarice. When/If you release on Steam stay away from their forums. It's asking for a trollfest, especially for an indie game.
Knowing people's opinions on what would constitute a 'finished' Rimworld is vastly different to a general list of suggestions. There are buckets of suggestions that I'd love to see implemented, but most or all of those needn't be necessary for the game for me to consider the game 'done'. I can't imagine that I'm the only one who thinks that way.
To my mind there are really only two things left for Rimworld and everything after that is gravy.
Rimworld's biggest problem, and this has really been the case from the beginning, is that it lacks any sort of late game. You pretty rapidly reach a point where your colony is all set up, research finishes rather shortly after, and then it becomes about surviving the raids. You can escape in the ship, but that's really rather unsatisfying in its current form. Even something fairly small here might change things rather nicely. For example, I'd love to know what happens to the colonists that we launch into space... and the ones left on the planet. If this were a story, and in a way every game of Rimworld is an interactive story, there's an epilogue missing from the experience. The conclusion (building the ship) is a little lacklustre at the moment, but it's serviceable.
Despite water being extremely important to us it's received only the most superficial of treatment in the game. In fact, beyond its existence it's effectively not there at all. No one could reasonably expect Dwarf Fortress or Gnomoria levels of detail in implementing water, but it should have some kind of mechanic associated with it rather than being a bit of a dead zone in terms of gameplay. It wouldn't even have to be a big feature. Take Banished, for example, it made water vital to gameplay by tying it directly with trade.
My tuppence anyway.
Quote from: NoImageAvailable on July 14, 2015, 05:49:03 PM
Expectations for content depth are set by the price, i.e. you expect a different amount of content from a $10 game than a $30 game.
I agree. If you feel the game is light on content for it's price, a valid criticism would be to say that, not to call it unfinished. If you order a pizza and it's too small, you call it too small, not half-baked.
My main purpose in this thread is to ask people not to blur the distinction between these things, because it leads to a lot of heartbreak.
Quote from: NoImageAvailable on July 14, 2015, 05:49:03 PM
the people on Kickstarter didn't throw money at you to do with as you please, they essentially commissioned you to make a game for them and while they couldn't see exactly what the finished product will look like there is still an obligation for it to conform to a certain standard. Did they take a risk when they paid you? Yes. Tomorrow you could be hit by a bus same as the artist painting a portrait, but that does not relieve you of your responsibility.
Of course. I'm totally obligated to conform to a certain standard - the standard of the game described and promised in the Kickstarter. That has already been exceeded. Every word of promise in the Kickstarter has already been fulfilled. If you can point to anything I promised in the Kickstarter that isn't fulfilled, please do so. Because I definitely want to make sure I cover all my bases for you guys.
Quote from: Devon_v on July 14, 2015, 08:04:29 PM
"Done" doesn't mean "set in stone". Terraria got two major patches like a year after the game was "done" because the developer felt like it. Blizzard did a massive rebalace of Diablo 2 out of nowhere like three years after it released.
I think that Tynan has been clear both that he considers Rimworld to be functional as a complete game as it is now, and that he still has ideas for more things to do with it.
Yes indeed - pretty good summary right there. These days, "done" just means the core promises are fulfilled. It doesn't mean it can't still be added to. (and of course, just because it can be added to doesn't mean it's not done).
[as I was writing this message, BAM ! Tynan answer, it still feel right]
Speculation here, but I'm feeling that Tynan want the game to switch into finished so he can get a different relationship with the Fanbase, from being "burdened by hope and expectations" to "I delivered and I might keep improving following suggestion".
Only one person know the truth on this but I think it's a reasonable logic,
However it rely on Kickstarter's Backer's considering themselves satisfied by the product and its price.
... also afraid it won't keep fans from considering the game is "lacking" things or missing its "real potential", but at least it will be purely subjective and less based on expectation (aside the Backers).
An example I know of this is KSP.
- It is "released".
- It is still being heavily "improved" right now (32bits to 64bits in a physic heavy game)
- Yet, many fans consider it rushed its release and require correction at least, if not reworking.
I'll just say that I also think the game is missing it's "real potential". Another way of putting it might be saying it is "lacking" things that would really grow it. That is, of course, why I am still working on it and hiring other people to work on it!
I just want to make the distinction between these things and "unfinished", because that distinction is important. It's the difference between "it would be so awesome if you..." and "you promised us you would...".
KSP example is instructive, thanks.
Quote from: Tynan on July 15, 2015, 10:41:06 AM
I agree. If you feel the game is light on content for it's price, a valid criticism would be to say that, not to call it unfinished. If you order a pizza and it's too small, you call it too small, not half-baked.
My main purpose in this thread is to ask people not to blur the distinction between these things, because it leads to a lot of heartbreak.
It mostly comes down to the game's current Alpha (meaning unfinished) status. To stay within the analogy, if a chef was putting on topping and suddenly declared he's done and he'll bake the pizza now I'd say "it's not done, you still need to add more pepperoni and cover the other half with cheese". If I was only presented with the already baked pizza after the fact I'd say "this pizza has almost no pepperoni and only one half has cheese, what the hell". If Rimworld was a 1.0 release I'd say it's light on content for the price, but since it is in Alpha I'm saying it still needs to be worked on.
Either way it's just semantics to me.
QuoteOf course. I'm totally obligated to conform to a certain standard - the standard of the game described and promised in the Kickstarter. That has already been exceeded. Every word of promise in the Kickstarter has already been fulfilled. If you can point to anything I promised in the Kickstarter that isn't fulfilled, please do so. Because I definitely want to make sure I cover all my bases for you guys.
Note that I'm not necessarily arguing that you did or did not fulfill the promises of the Kickstarter. My issue was more that in your other posts you seemed to argue that as a creator you have absolute freedom and are not bound by anything, when you are accountable to the Kickstarter backers. But it seems we are in agreement here.
Quotein your other posts you seemed to argue that as a creator you have absolute freedom and are not bound by anything
I'd never say anything like this. I've always said that as a creator I'm bound by my promises - no more and no less.
Be careful with analogy guys, at some point they take a life of their own and murder their creators.
Joke aside, thank you Tynan for the clarification.
Right now I can only say this : I understand you want us to recognize the work you've put into this as "worth its damn" or "Sufficient by itself". However it is to me a lost battle and we can't put the blame on anyone as long as
- there's backer's /E-Access alive
- the game is sold as Alpha
So really, this topic is simply a new database for you to know what a vocal-minority would prefer over anything else, a different nuance than "what do you want next ?" since it imply the finished game. Obviously, like any other suggestion you are not forced to let it influence you.
We participate to this thread to share opinions anyway, some of us trust you to choose more wisely than us.
Tynan, I think most of the panic/angst some are feeling over you saying the game can be considered "finished" is the huge number of burns many have had over kickstarter/EA over the past few years (starbound was what did it to me).
I'm also disappointed to hear that development might stop, but I'm not terribly concerned yet because you haven't definitively said it will stop. I understand the need for a break and hope very much it'll allow you to continue working on the game, because there are still a few aspects that I feel could be refined/expanded (faction trading/diplomacy, more events, etc) Even if you don't do anything else, as you've said, you've met the promises in the original kickstarter. Thinking about it, I would still be happy with the $30 I spent right now as well.
That doesn't mean I'm not going to put on my biggest, cutest set of puppy eyes and beg you to continue the excellent work you've done (after your well deserved break of course). I want to tell everyone that tugging Tynan's heartstrings is probably a better tactic than trying to argue/obligate/force etc etc so stop being so hard on him
Frankly, if the game was released as final as build 11 I'd consider my money well spent and whatever "promises" there were fulfilled. So I find all the talk of said promises being unfulfilled or of Tynan owing customers ridiculous. That's not to say I'd be happy that it was finalized in its current form, but I'd still be satisfied as a customer.
I've paid a lot more for a lot less. I consider about 50c/hr to be a "good deal" for a game, which for Rimworld would mean 60 hours of playtime. I think I've certainly gotten close to that by now, and enjoyed every minute of it.
As a customer, that's all that's important: did I get my money's worth? I did already, and I'm sure I will get a lot more of it in the future. This is the sort of game I can pick up and play again years from now.
That said, I definitely want and hope for a lot more features and content. Like my pet wish, Area of Effect Buildings, a far more involved tech tree, a lot more variety and decor, a water system, and improved factions and diplomacy/trading.
I got burned on Starbound, too, but that's Chucklefish's fault, I'm not going to hold it against Early Access in general. Dungeon of the Endless had a near flawless EA cycle, and Darkest Dungeon is doing quite nicely as well.
Early Access seems to mean so many things to different people. I see it as being an investor. Some people have an idea. They need money to make it happen. I give them money. I am well aware that it might fail, or that the reality of what they are working on may result in unforseen changes. I understood the risks going in, but I felt it was worth it because I wanted that game to exist.
Tynan, you need a break and time to think about the game whilst not staring at its code all day and nearly every day. I would put off all this angst and go do stuff that has nothing to do with games and gamers. Then come back with a fresh mind.
I am pretty sure that near everyone on the forums wants the game to be as successful as it can be. I can see from reading through the posts on the topic that even die hard fans are not always reading the game's status the same way you are. This will multiply by many times once it gets to steam. Be very, very ready for the steam launch because there is a lot of insanity and ill informed comment there and if you go at it with your current 'burnt out' defensive attitude it could be ugly.
Go look at the way you were answering questions and concerns about the game in the early days - is there a difference? If so, why?
You have a very good game -a break and fresh perspective could make it great.
Also when you do take your break make it a long one and don't take your phone or a computer. Make it a real break. The game will still be here. The fan base will still be here and you are likely to come back with a brand new head on full of exciting thoughts and if your lucky and party very hard you might even have much of your initial energy and vision replenished.
Quote from: Tynan on July 15, 2015, 10:41:06 AM
Yes indeed - pretty good summary right there. These days, "done" just means the core promises are fulfilled. It doesn't mean it can't still be added to. (and of course, just because it can be added to doesn't mean it's not done).
Whilst absolutely true, as a gamer I'm completely at your mercy in terms of information about the future of the game. I'm sure there are plenty of examples where released was done and the developer moved onto other things, no more bug fixes, no more content, the end. With the level of access we have to you and the potential to shape the future of Rimworld, it may be selfish but I think it's fairly natural for people to try get as much as they can before believe that they're not going to get any more.
I just want pizza now :D
Quote from: Tynan on July 15, 2015, 11:10:15 AM
I'll just say that I also think the game is missing it's "real potential". Another way of putting it might be saying it is "lacking" things that would really grow it. That is, of course, why I am still working on it and hiring other people to work on it!
I just want to make the distinction between these things and "unfinished", because that distinction is important. It's the difference between "it would be so awesome if you..." and "you promised us you would...".
KSP example is instructive, thanks.
There definitely needs to be more added to the game but the real issue I've seen so far is it doesn't feel like there is any progression. The only real thing you need to rush in research right now is turret gun cooling everything else is just there for when you happen to get it. It only takes a couple of in game days to build your kill box base because nearly everything is able to be created once you load the game. Also you cant even craft guns which is a huge problem right now if you decide not to use mods.
I think we should just close this thread and move on e.e
Quote from: Darastrix on July 15, 2015, 03:52:18 PM
I just want pizza now :D
If I understand this thread correctly, and I think I do, it's that Tynan is promising us all pizza.
All I really want before 1.0 is an expansion to existing features. Some things, like trading, diplomacy, and the number and variety of random events have a sort of placeholder, we'll-come-back-and-finish-it-later kind of feel. If the existing features were fleshed out a bit more, I wouldn't mind if no actual new feature were added.
Quote from: Z0MBIE2 on July 15, 2015, 04:57:07 PM
I think we should just close this thread and move on e.e
Yeah, I agree. Thanks to everyone who contributed. For talking about things you want to see in the game, mosey on down to the suggestions forum please.