How close to completion is the game now?

[wooaa]

Like it has been said, it will be done when it is done, witch may be a while. That being said, I have had so much fun with the game that Tynan could call the game done tomorrow and I would feel like i got my moneys worth.

[akiceabear]

My guess is the game will go on Steam, then A12 will come out with some features and bugfixes, and then the game will formally exit alpha. Afterwards Tynan will still develop updates but not at the same pace.

At the very least he's mentioned a long holiday coming late this summer.

[Axelios]

I hope that's not true. I will be disappointed if new content stops coming. The game is good but still boring without mods. I think it needs more work on the vanilla.

[akiceabear]

I hope that's not true. I will be disappointed if new content stops coming. The game is good but still boring without mods. I think it needs more work on the vanilla.

Like I said, my guess is that he will still develop, just not at the same pace or regularity. I didn't speculate that new content would stop coming...

[Axelios]

I hope that's not true. I will be disappointed if new content stops coming. The game is good but still boring without mods. I think it needs more work on the vanilla.

Like I said, my guess is that he will still develop, just not at the same pace or regularity. I didn't speculate that new content would stop coming...

No, you didn't speculate that. I realised this awhile after posting my reply, but oh well. Putting aside implications of what you meant, and just making a general statement - I would be disappointed if new content stopped coming. There are some great mods that look like they make the game really good; but the quality of the game should become really good without needing the mods.

[akiceabear]

No, you didn't speculate that. I realised this awhile after posting my reply, but oh well. Putting aside implications of what you meant, and just making a general statement - I would be disappointed if new content stopped coming. There are some great mods that look like they make the game really good; but the quality of the game should become really good without needing the mods.

Just to clarify, I wasn't trying to be snarky above, just stating my position more clearly

I agree, and think that the game needs more work for vanilla to be considered a masterpiece - and it definitely has this potential.

That said, I think the overall game experience (mods + vanilla) could benefit from a more moderate pace of releases. I think the current average is every 2-3 months - what if it went to every 4-6 months? The the key mods would only need an update perhaps twice a year, making maintenance of some of the already amazing mods less daunting for volunteers. It is a bit of a shame to look back at the old mods that haven't made it to A10/11, some of which looked stellar.

[Silvador]

The game is still in ALPHA! There's still Beta to go lol XD

[zespri]

I don't have a "final vision" for the game because I consider design to be an exploratory process. So I keep "lodestars" to guide and focus the design, but it's not about coloring in some predetermined set of lines in my head.

Some people like me and some of my friends prefer not to buy unfinished games. This is because we were burnt before paying for buggy stuff that never gets finished.

Many developers will make a milestone that they can call 1.0. It will have defined feature set will be tested enough and polished to support said feature set. Then people who value stability can go ahead and buy 1.0. But that does not mean that the development should stop. There can be 2.0 and 3.0 and so on afterwards. Take AI War from Arcen game for example. They are at version 8.0 now, several years later and still going.

From the above quote it looks like you will stop when it becomes unfeasible.  That is, it sounds like release will mark The End, the death of the game. At this stage if you are an indie and not triple A some people would consider purchase unappealing. After all you finished not because it's perfect, but simply because you lost interest or money stopped trickling in.

With that in mind, it looks like people like me will miss out completely on the game (my loss, I know). I do not want to buy the game now, until it reached stability, but I'm as unlikely to buy it later, because well, there will be minimal chances for after release fixes, etc.

I'm wondering, would it make sense for you to slap a "release" label on stable enough build/state to reach the part of the audience I'm describing?

An important thing here for me would be that the game will then be reviewed as a "release" and I would be able to judge from these reviews how feature complete / stable it is.

[akiceabear]

Many developers will make a milestone that they can call 1.0. It will have defined feature set will be tested enough and polished to support said feature set. Then people who value stability can go ahead and buy 1.0. But that does not mean that the development should stop. There can be 2.0 and 3.0 and so on afterwards. Take AI War from Arcen game for example. They are at version 8.0 now, several years later and still going.

In addition to stability of the modding environment, this is another reason going to 1.0 relatively soon shouldn't be seen as the offensive affront that some posters feel it would be.

Moreover, I'm pretty sure the game's current state meets a majority of the initial roadmap set out on Kickstarter - let's assume another alpha or two to round out those features to a quality one could reasonably expect for a development team of this scope. Anything on top of that is icing on the cake, but hardly obligated.

I personally wouldn't mind if the game was released, mods stabilized, and Tynan took a Paradox style DLC approach to determine what to add going forward. Although I imagine it would incense many here if that strategy was pursued.

[TLHeart]

go and listen to what tynan said at the end of the sappers release video, starting at the 17 minute mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LR9wqSyfSwQ

he feel the game is a pretty well rounded game, at this point.

Judge what he says for yourselves.

[Tynan]

After all you finished not because it's perfect, but simply because you lost interest or money stopped trickling in.

"It's perfect" is not a healthy or reasonable standard to use to call a game finished. A game like this can always have more stuff added. If I set that as the standard, I would have no choice but to work on nothing but RimWorld continuously until my death. There is no way someone can expect me to uphold that standard or criticize me for literally not spending my entire life giving them extra free content.

there will be minimal chances for after release fixes

Not sure why you'd say that. Regardless of how much more content is added, I have every intention of supporting the game for a long time and making sure it's nice and bug-free when I do finally step away from it. This includes post-release fixes.

would it make sense for you to slap a "release" label on stable enough build/state to reach the part of the audience I'm describing?

An important thing here for me would be that the game will then be reviewed as a "release" and I would be able to judge from these reviews how feature complete / stable it is.

I was going to just call an upcoming build "release" and likely keep adding new content. The problem with this is what you wrote. As soon as the game is "released", everyone's going to review it then and there. I'm sure it'd do okay, but now I'm in a weird situation where I'm adding content to a game that will never get a proper evaluation, and putting resources in to fix problems that are still complained about in old reviews.

It doesn't make much sense for me to take a game to which I intend to add many more features - like this one - and call it "finished" early for no real reason. Kerbal was in alpha for like 5 years because they added content for 5 years. That's what alpha means - content is being added. So I'm choosing to stick with the definition of the word for now, and defer 1.0 until I'm pretty sure that I'm not adding substantial more stuff to the game.

[Uglyr]

It doesn't make much sense for me to take a game to which I intend to add many more features - like this one - and call it "finished" early for no real reason. Kerbal was in alpha for like 5 years because they added content for 5 years. That's what alpha means - content is being added. So I'm choosing to stick with the definition of the word for now, and defer 1.0 until I'm pretty sure that I'm not adding substantial more stuff to the game.

Big companies usualy have the other vision. Nice and stable enough = Release. Content to be added = DLC. Update graphics a bit = "GameName II". Leave all mechanic intact and change names, items and pictures to medieval = "GameName: Middle ages". 

[zespri]

"It's perfect" is not a healthy or reasonable standard to use to call a game finished.

Of course. I'm a software developer and I know this better than most. I did not mean for you to interpret this literally. Sorry, I could have been more clear. But that's a minor point. Thank you for your reply I appreciate it a lot. I'm sorry that you remained unconvinced, but hey, it's your game and your choice, I can respect that. Thank you again, for sharing your view.

[Tynan]

Thanks. To clarify, I don't mean to announce anything about what I'm going to do. Just make a general statement on the principle of "when is it ok to call a game finished". I think the best standard is, "when you've fulfilled development promises", which I think I've pretty well covered at this point. I think I'll work a lot more on RimWorld anyway, though, because people like it, I like it, and it's profitable. I might need to take a break though.

[Uglyr]

Thanks. To clarify, I don't mean to announce anything about what I'm going to do. Just make a general statement on the principle of "when is it ok to call a game finished". I think the best standard is, "when you've fulfilled development promises", which I think I've pretty well covered at this point. I think I'll work a lot more on RimWorld anyway, though, because people like it, I like it, and it's profitable. I might need to take a break though.

Being office support/developer I also tend to promise(negotiate for) less, then give more than promised. Rather than promise more - give less.