What do you guys think needs added to Rimworld for it to be considered done?

[Tynan]

Thank you very much for all the replies everyone

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.

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.

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.

[TLHeart]

Thank you very much for all the replies everyone

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.

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.

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.

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.

[skullywag]

"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.

[NoImageAvailable]

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.

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.

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.

[skullywag]

You didnt pay for anything, you kickstarted, commission doesnt come into it, thats a very bad analogy.

[SSS]

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.

[Devon_v]

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.

[KC]

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.

[skullywag]

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.

[akiceabear]

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)

[Aristocat]

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.

[Avarice]

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.

[mumblemumble]

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

[Veneke]

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.

• An end-game.
• Water.

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.

[Tynan]

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.

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.

"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).