Hello all! I'm sure this is a question that no one can definitively answer, except for maybe Tynan, so this is just for fun discussion.
How many more Alphas do you think we will get? For most games, Alpha is for implementing new features and testing them out. Eventually once all features are added it would move on to a "Beta" phase where bugs and balance are worked out. Then, finally, the 1.0 release.
What are all of your thoughts about this process? How far along do you think we are? I know there are still some features that players want, but I'm just curious as to how many more Alpha versions you think we'll get. Tynan can't go on forever adding new features in Alpha after Alpha. At some point it has to be "done" and move on to the next phase. What features do you think Tynan is still wanting to implement before moving on to Beta?
Quote from: MisterVertigo on June 13, 2017, 12:51:09 PMTynan can't go on forever adding new features in Alpha after Alpha....
I think you seriously underestimate the ability of an artisan to never be satisfied that a work is truly "finished." There's always *something* else that needs to be done or added or modified or tweaked before it's ready.... :D
I'd love to see this game just get more and more features and more and more depth to the existing features indefinitely
Heh, you make a good point about an artist never being "done". I'm assuming at SOME point though Tynan will want to work on something else, and in order to do so he'll have to "finish" this one. Kind of like when I have a great colony going, but the time comes when it's time to let that one go and start a new one! :)
Considering the game is NOT discounted while in Alpha and is still selling (AFAIK) reasonably well, Tynan quite frankly has no real reason to ever move beyond this stage. As long as the game is enjoyable, I frankly don't care; an engaged, actively creating developer is ideal. Additionally, the "Alpha" designation allows major changes that a "finished product" doesn't absorb as easily.
I doubt he will actually keep RimWorld in Alpha forever but I also don't see any real problem with it. Be aware, some games are in Alpha for years while remaining largely unplayable, which is not the case for RimWorld.
Oh, I'm not complaining. I love the fact that the game is so enjoyable despite being designated an "Alpha". I'm not in any rush for development to stop either, I was just curious what other people's thoughts were regarding how many new features will get put in before the final product is released.
I wasn't trying to chastise you, sorry if it came out that way. As for "how many features"... Who knows?
Alphas will continue until Tynan gets fed up with people asking how long 'til the next release, what features are coming next, and how many more alphas there will be. Then he'll just say "hell with it" and declare it finished and move on to something else.
;)
Yeah, what Burgdorf said. Look into the development history and road left to go with Dwarf Fortress. Long story short, we could still be here ten years from now.
Due to the implications, I'll be sad when the product v1.0 is released. It's hard to complain, though. I've already gotten my money's worth of entertainment and then some.
Why? Just because it hits "1.0", that merely means it's hit "prime time", so to speak. there's no reason at all the game cannot continue to develop, and many do. For indie games, SPAZ 1 is a great example; they came out with the (free) "Bounty Hunters" DLC long after the initial release.
When the faction system is finally expanded upon and becomes a core part of the gameplay experience. Because imo, that's the only major feature that hasn't been fleshed out yet, preventing the game from truly being called "complete".
Maybe he'll want to work on Rimworld 2 someday
How many more alphas you ask?
Well all of them
Quote from: A Friend on June 13, 2017, 08:22:52 PM
When the faction system is finally expanded upon and becomes a core part of the gameplay experience. Because imo, that's the only major feature that hasn't been fleshed out yet, preventing the game from truly being called "complete".
What are your thoughts on a better faction system? I find myself wanting it "better" but don't really know how it could be that way.
Who cares whether its in Alpha or Omega or Delta lol its the best indie game in the market and gets better each update; we as the consumer stand only to gain as time passes.
Many indie games spend forever in Alpha and play like trash, incomplete, then get abandoned (like Pixel Piracy)
Rimworld is already almost AAA quality, it could be released tomorrow and still hold its overwhelming positive rating on Steam.
Fortunately because of the type of game Rimworld is, there is unlimited room for improvement, and thats a good thing!
Don't even get me started on the amazing mod community.
Quote from: mcgnarman on June 14, 2017, 12:15:52 AM
Quote from: A Friend on June 13, 2017, 08:22:52 PM
When the faction system is finally expanded upon and becomes a core part of the gameplay experience. Because imo, that's the only major feature that hasn't been fleshed out yet, preventing the game from truly being called "complete".
What are your thoughts on a better faction system? I find myself wanting it "better" but don't really know how it could be that way.
In short: Region based factions that varies in strength and personality. And giving us different ways to interact with them. All the while making full use of the map, caravan and quest system. The faction system would make your Rimworld experience depend on what neighbors you happen to have.
Here's how I imagine it.
Factions are found in small regions and occupies territory. Factions also have a set amount of strength that determines how big their territory is, how heavily defended their bases are and how numerous and well-armed their troops are. Losing bases, caravans and failed raids weaken them but they can also get stronger over time. Factions can be involved in wars where the two sides send raiding parties to attack the other. Factions would
Pirates factions could be:
- Mercenaries (Heavily armed groups that'll leave you alone as long as you don't get in their way.)
- Opportunistic (Weak but hostile gangs that ambush you in the road or does extortions.)
- Merchant (Black Market-esque group that specializes in drugs, guns, bionics, slaves, etc.)
- Merciless (Your typical pirates that raid, kidnap and plunder. Very hard to communicate with and will hunt you down in their territory.)
With this, your interaction with pirates won't just be the predictable weekly event we now have. Depending on whose territory you land on, you can have a vastly different experience.
Scenario 1: You land in a territory occupied by Pirate Merchants. They leave you be early game. Sometime later, they find out that you've also been growing and producing drugs. Your good relations with nearby outlander towns ensure that they visit you more than them. The pirates are pissed off by this and becomes hostile to you.
Scenario 2: You land in a territory occupied by Merciless Pirates. They attack you constantly. Nearby are a group of Mercenaries. You pay them thousands of silver and they start a war with the Pirates. Mercenary NPCs roam around intercepting incoming raiders.
Scenario 3: An opportunistic gang ambushes your colonists on the road. They're alive but have been sold to a Pirate Merchant nearby. You could plan a rescue, buy them back, or beg the pirates to let them go at the cost of your relations with them.
And that's just pirates, there'd also be different kinds of tribals and outlanders with their own likes and dislikes that conflicts with each other. Just imagine the quest combinations that you can have with them. Relations would be more meaningful as it would determine what diplomatic options you'll have when interacting with factions.
okay well that's my idea for now, ill come back later, I suffered a little accident involving my thumb and a sharp object.