On the upcoming Steam release

[SSS]

This was also posted as a reply to the blog post, but I would like to cover my bases and post it here also:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I have mixed feelings here, but it's mostly because I don't agree that all of the holes have been plugged yet. Namely, I think there's one more important area that hasn't been covered, and that's in the number of unique events. Most of the alphas have introduced core mechanic changes that did keep the game fresh, but in terms of variety of what can happen, I still find the game quite lacking. You might say that's nitpicking, but please try to understand where I'm coming from.

For a game that calls itself a storytelling engine, variety and replayability are extremely important, yet the same basic game progression is present in the game regardless of how you start out: Biome differences might change your initial priorities, but in the overall view temperature control and growing schedules are a small (if important) part of the game. In such a situation with a generally similar progression, a considerable number of unique events is important to keep the game fresh. Tynan himself has admitted that the late-game still needs work (which I view as evidence of a lack of content); whether he has changed his mind, I don't know. (I hope not.)

Sure, you could say that's there's a lot of content available via modding, and I do applaud Tynan on his support of the modding community, but major core elements of the game should not be required to obtain through modding. It's the difference between considering a game finished and unfinished. However, at this point you may ask, "at what point is it enough"? How many events does the game need in order for there to be enough combinations to keep the game fun to replay for a long time? (I'm talking about "legitimate", game-promoted replayability- not player self-impositions that create an "artificial" replayability.) That, I cannot say for certain. I can say that once the core foundation for the game is laid in terms of mechanics, the more events that could be added, the better. This is the all-important "content". It's what makes the storytelling engine able to generate a variety of unique stories!

I am not arguing that Tynan hasn't worked hard, or that he hasn't treated his community properly. On the contrary, his interaction with the community is stellar, a somewhat rare occurrence even amongst indie developers. If anything, I might suggest that he's worked himself too hard, which might be partly why he's burning out right now. Even if you love something, working at it incessantly will eventually tire anyone- and to be honest I'm surprised that he didn't burn out sooner than this.

Speculation on that matter isn't the point here, though. Again, my point is not to criticize Tynan. It is to criticize the notion that the game has enough content to be called complete. What's the point in setting a foundation, even a foundation of masterwork quality, if you don't build anything upon it? That is why I am disappointed with this announcement. I just can't bring myself to think a game can be called complete when you've merely (not used in a derogatory sense, mind you) completed the core mechanics.

Tynan may come back to add more content. That's great, but to present it as something "more than we were promised" seems like quite a stretch to me, and to be honest it leaves a bit of a bitter taste in my mouth. Yet, we're placed in this position of "but Tynan has worked so hard- how can you be so ungrateful?" which, in my opinion, is unfair to consumers (speaking perhaps only for myself, but also possibly for others not brave enough to speak up) who rightfully expected more content than we were given. (I would like to emphasize again how important content is in the context of a storytelling engine. This should have been presented as a strategy/management game if mechanics were to be the primary focus.)

I do acknowledge that I took on a risk in buying the game while it was still in development, but I don't think this exempts Ludeon Studios from what I believe to be legitimate expectations. Should I, the consumer, be held responsible or vilified through the circumstances if the developer burns out on development, and I am not satisfied with the result? Is that not the developer's responsibility all the same?

I would like to note that I am not so displeased that I would even imagine to ask for a refund, or anything like that. Even in what I consider a pre-finished state, I have spent a considerable amount of time playing the game, to the point my conscience simply would not allow such a thought to cross my mind, so please don't let this post's intentions be misunderstood. However, in a near-unanimous (if not completely unanimous) cry of praise and support, I felt rather alienated and underrepresented in my feelings toward this. I have tried to express my disappointment as politely and gratefully as possible, but all the same, I am disappointed, and I wanted to express that.

In any case, I would like to congratulate Tynan on the work he has done so far, and I am happy that he will allow himself a decent break. It certainly sounds like he needs one.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Other users here have brought up additional points, such as how the faction system feels relatively shallow and the research progression is too fast, but to be honest I feel like these could be considered more on the mechanics side, which isn't my primary concern even if I do agree that these areas could be improved.

Some of the posts in this thread seem more in line with my feelings. They weren't as present in the blog post comments.

[Vas]

he mentioned it in the comments. "Just to follow up, based on a bunch of feedback I think I probably will just release it 1.0. It's ready for that. Nothing of substance about what I wrote originally would have changed - it's purely a labeling issue."

it is not a labeling issue, but meeting the expectations of the new community based upon the label. It is a very big deal if he wants to continue to be able to market he game, and make an income from it.

It's about choosing the label that sets the expectations that best match reality. The facts of the situation are the same either way - the question is just what to call it.

Just my thoughts, but releasing as Alpha state game would get you a good community of buyers and new ideas and such right off the bat, considering there isn't a whole heck of a lot of content to the game right now.  I mean, sure, you can play through a few times, lose a lot, finish once finally, same generic style on each biome you play on with slight tweaks, but eventually the person may get bored.  The whole reason people play so much right now is the mods, many of these mods that are in the community are required by many people to play, including me, I have a few mods that are absolute required for me to enjoy the game much more than the basic.  I only play without mods to test new builds and report bugs.

there is so little actual content.

Lots of people play dozens of hours of RimWorld. How much 'actual content' would be considered a normal amount in your mind? I hate to be frank but I think you're kind of being unreasonable here. Demanding I hit Dwarf Fortress-level content volumes just isn't reasonable. Calling a game where players regularly do 15-100 hours of play "so little content" just isn't reasonable. "So little content" would more accurately describe how the game was back around Alpha 1, where you could do everything in like 3-4 hours.

Yea, "so little" content may be an understatement right now.  People tend to see this because of the large amount of mods that are out right now and they add like 10 mods and see 10 times more content based on that.  To be honest, some of the mods out there should be core default things in the game. [1] [2*] [3*] [More]
However, in the core game alone, it does feel a little more empty than it should be.  Less features than I'd like, lots of room for improvements, you will likely be flooded with requests for features that have already been requested in the past hundreds of times.  Such as making it possible to change all hydroponics that are selected to a specific plant type which is a pretty big annoyance considering you always select the plant first, then click again to select hydro, then select grow, then select a plant, and repeat 30 more times for a large colony, generally hating hydroponics because of this.  I've got 29 detailed suggestion posts around the suggestion board myself, I'm sure there are others who feel that certain things should be core parts of the game too prior to a full release.

I'm not saying don't release on steam as a full release, I'm just saying consider alpha mode for a bit.  I don't think it hurts the game at all, considering people b---- and moan about alpha games all the time and yet STILL get them.  Then your game will be listed on the front page again once it hits full release and exits Alpha.

Also I'd love to see achievements in the game, especially for those that are private testers and such.    Might need to make a forum login script in game to verify your account to get the achievement.  I dunno, just a random thought thrown out there.

I've played Banished myself and have enjoyed it. Also considering that it was supposedly all done by 1 single guy working on it, the level of content it has is pretty impressive. Overall, while it is fundamentally different from Rimworld, it is technically similar as well. The main difference being an accelerated timeframe and RW having an actual end game if we were to choose it. Banished is basically never-ending.

That said, Banished is considered a finished game and RW is still in development. Also, vanilla RW is fun and playable but definitely, in order to have an even more enjoyable experience, playing with mods is the way to go. So much so that I find that without mods now, I don't really want to dive into a new build till some mods have been updated. However, despite the rather steep pricing of RW, I definitely don't regret buying it.

Don't forget that Banished is an abandon game, the developer abandoned the unfinished game and left it as "released" so he wouldn't have to refund anyone.  I've played it too and while it's playable, it lacks so very much and makes no sense in most areas and is generally boring, it's no where near as good as the video that got me to buy it way back when it went on steam sale.  I'm generally sick of Developers abandoning their games (Like 4 others I have).  I am 99% sure that Tynan won't do that though.

I do agree on mod play, as you can see earlier in my post.  Playing without mods just gets a bit boring for me.  The same standard tactic is what I do each and every time no matter the biome I play in.  The price is questionable for this level of content, but it would be worth it, knowing that the game isn't abandon and will continue to be updated and new content will be added, plus the fact that there are some great mods out there, some of which I wish would be put in core game before release but, I guess that won't happen now that it is being released. 

[Tynan]

I didn't realize mods were so important to so many of you, actually. As I said before, though, I think that would always be the case even if I worked for 10 more years, just because modders will always vastly outnumber me. I can't compete with that amount of sheer manpower. So the fact that mods add a ton to the game doesn't lead to the conclusion that the base game is unfinished. I mean, I played Half-Life mods for years after finishing with the base game in a month or two. But Half-Life base game was a finished game.

stuff

Hi SSS, thanks for the thought-out reply. In response I want to start by noting that I have always said exactly what I said in this post: nobody should buy this (or any) game based on guesses of what it might eventually become. Buy it (or don't) for what it is today.
If you purchased RW while it was in a state that you did *not* feel was worth purchasing, based on your own personal guesses of what it might become, you were taking a big risk – one I've always advised against.

I'm happy to fulfil my promises (in fact usually I try to over-fulfil them). That's my obligation. But I can't be obligated to do years of work that I explicitly did *not* promise, because other people assumed/hoped/guessed I would. That kind of un-agreed-upon, external obligation just isn't cool. As a creator I have to have the choice of what to promise, just as the consumer has the choice of what to buy.

That said – RW is a fun project and I agree with you that there's lots of room to grow. So I'll most likely do more work on it at some point. But that will just be a fun bonus. As I've always said: if the game isn't satisfactory to you as it is now, just wait on it! I'm happy to have anyone as a customer now or later. And if the game never becomes what you want, you'll never buy it. Disappointment averted, everyone wins!

stuff

Who says Banished was abandoned? I followed that development and that never seemed to be the case at all. Where does this come from?

It's kind of worrying because it honestly looks like people just make these myths up and start saying them over and over regardless of the facts or what the dev said before release.

[Euzio]

Don't worry Tynan. While mods have become a big part of how we play RW. Ultimately, its still an add-on. RW is definitely playable without any mods. In fact, I would encourage any new players to have at least 1 playthrough without any mods to get a feel for the game. Its what I did myself when I first got the game. Mods ultimately, for the most part, actually make the game slightly easier in a sense.

Also, I've never heard of Banished being released unfinished. The base game itself is finished as far as I know. If you're talking about updates and maybe further balancing tweaks, then its definitely not being continued as far as I know. I haven't kept myself up to date with Banished for quite awhile mainly because RW has been occupying the majority of my gaming time.

[TwixFunSize]

Since Alpha 1 I have seen Rimworld change and become better over time into what it is today. Thank You Tynan for making this my FAVORITE game.

[SSS]

stuff

Hi SSS, thanks for the thought-out reply. In response I want to start by noting that I have always said exactly what I said in this post: nobody should buy this (or any) game based on guesses of what it might eventually become. Buy it (or don't) for what it is today.
If you purchased RW while it was in a state that you did *not* feel was worth purchasing, based on your own personal guesses of what it might become, you were taking a big risk – one I've always advised against.

I'm happy to fulfil my promises (in fact usually I try to over-fulfil them). That's my obligation. But I can't be obligated to do years of work that I explicitly did *not* promise, because other people assumed/hoped/guessed I would. That kind of un-agreed-upon, external obligation just isn't cool. As a creator I have to have the choice of what to promise, just as the consumer has the choice of what to buy.

That said – RW is a fun project and I agree with you that there's lots of room to grow. So I'll most likely do more work on it at some point. But that will just be a fun bonus. As I've always said: if the game isn't satisfactory to you as it is now, just wait on it! I'm happy to have anyone as a customer now or later. And if the game never becomes what you want, you'll never buy it. Disappointment averted, everyone wins!

The caveat here is that I wouldn't recommend Rimworld to anyone else at the current price point, particularly if they were drawn by the description "storytelling engine". You can distance yourself by pointing out that you never explicitly promised additional content, but that the game is in an alpha state should and does imply to most that a good deal of additional content is to be added. Again, it is true that this relies on consumer assumption, and the fault can be laid on the consumer in the strictest sense, but I also feel it breaks the sense of trust that has been present until now. No true sense of how much content would be in the game when it was finished was ever established, meaning consumers had to make some degree of assumption. To then take that necessity of assumption and say it's the consumer's fault for making any assumption in the first place is unfair in my opinion.

I am not trying to pressure you to add more content to the game right now. All I am saying is that you didn't present the game fairly. The necessity of assumptions when no idea was given of what the completed product would look like, combined with the idea that you shouldn't buy on assumptions, basically equivalents to you saying that nobody should have bought your game since you didn't set any measure of expectation.

If that's how it is, I suppose I have no more to say. By your own words, I should have judged the situation better, and I agree.

[Tynan]

No true sense of how much content would be in the game when it was finished was ever established, meaning consumers had to make some degree of assumption

Ok, well I agree with the first part of this, however the second part just isn't true. No assumptions about the future need to be made at all. The consumer's best advice is to look at a product as it is today and decide if they want that. If they don't want what's right there in front of them, don't buy. No assumptions needed.

[SSS]

No true sense of how much content would be in the game when it was finished was ever established, meaning consumers had to make some degree of assumption

Ok, well I agree with the first part of this, however the second part just isn't true. No assumptions about the future need to be made at all. The consumer's best advice is to look at a product as it is today and decide if they want that. If they don't want what's right there in front of them, don't buy. No assumptions needed.

This is being marketed as an alpha release of a game, not a complete game. There is inherent implication in the nature of being marketed as an "alpha release". That is the difference.

If this were being marketed as a complete game already, then I would agree.

[Tynan]

No true sense of how much content would be in the game when it was finished was ever established, meaning consumers had to make some degree of assumption

Ok, well I agree with the first part of this, however the second part just isn't true. No assumptions about the future need to be made at all. The consumer's best advice is to look at a product as it is today and decide if they want that. If they don't want what's right there in front of them, don't buy. No assumptions needed.

This is being marketed as an alpha release of a game, not a complete game. That is the difference.

If this were being marketed as a complete game already, then I would agree.

Ok. Well we can agree to disagree on this specific point. In any case, I appreciate the thoughts.

[Vas]

Good Stuff!

Who says Banished was abandoned? I followed that development and that never seemed to be the case at all. Where does this come from?

It's kind of worrying because it honestly looks like people just make these myths up and start saying them over and over regardless of the facts or what the dev said before release.

EDIT: I'm going mostly based on my experience with the games themselves.

Well, after I got the game, I found some issues and many other things in the game that did not meet my expectations of what was talked about originally and shown in the video.  So I played several times, got the hang of it, felt it was rather empty.  This was before using mods.  I then went to suggest some changes on the forums and such, and all the big time heavy modders have said the devs are gone and the game is abandon, that a glitch that happened in the workshop will never be fixed (hundreds of people re-posted other people's mods all over the workshop, you might want to make sure that doesn't happen in yours ) so it became a big problem and now the banished workshop with hundreds of re-posts of the same exact mod over and over again, only the developers can fix this, but they won't.  They made it so it won't continue happening but they won't clean up the mess they made, nor does it seem like the game has had an update for half a year or more.  I'd say a minimum of 7 months.  I just went off what the big hard core modders have stated, because usually, big time modders of any game tend to follow that game closely enough that they know the scoop.

I'm not saying Banished is a bad game, it's just that it feels unfinished, underdeveloped, and not well thought out.  it had potential, and at current version, it's playable.  That's about it.  More so of a snooze fest, I just turn it on, do a few things, get the economy going, then go to sleep after setting up some larger projects to collect over night.  At least it isn't as abandon as Spacebase DF-9.    It's amazing how much work they put into the site but not the game.    Glitches everywhere, disappointments at every turn, crappy AI.  It also had potential.  Rimworld, is so far the only Alpha game that hasn't been a disappointment at all.  Space Engineers makes a close second, but disappointed in the lack of communication between developers and the community, and there's like 25-50 of them, they split off the team to make a separate game.  -.-

Alpha games have a history of being abandon because of the long period of time they stay in alpha, and because eventually the developers slow on the update process to one update every 6 months or less and/or just end up leaving and not appearing in the community anymore and such.  Rimworld is one of the games that could prove the alpha game reputation wrong. 

Unfortunately, even full games get abandon sometimes too.  My favorite game of all time, Metal Drift, basically shut down, all work on it stopped.  All official multiplayer servers gone too.  Bleh.

[Euzio]

In actual sense, Banished wasn't abandoned or anything then. The game was essentially released as a complete state. And since its not a subscription based game or stated as an alpha, the developer had no real obligation to continue working on the game or tweaking it. Therefore, we can't really go out and say that its abandoned or unfinished.

As for RW, considering the state of Alpha games, it is not uncommon for the initial description of the game to be different to what is being given at the point of time. Its all about working on priorities. Adding mechanics, fixing bugs, content, stories, etc. are all dependent on what the developer (namely Tynan), feels is the one that needs work on at this point of time. Add to the fact that since it is an Alpha game and Tynan actively reads through almost all the suggestions and ideas that people have posted in the forums, it is also quite common for him to get side-tracked a little to add in a great suggestion that someone had posted or a mod that he finds essentially to the base game. Thus, the nature of Alpha games is that it is ever-evolving and for us as the ones who are committing to buying the game, we should be well aware of the implications of buying such a game that has already clearly stated it is in alpha.

The situation is very similar to another Steam game, 7 Days to Die. The developers there do actively listen to what the community is suggesting and in any sense, the game has evolved into a far more complex game than what you can garner from its own kickstarter goals. That said, it hasn't fulfilled all that it has stated in its own kickstarter due to the aforementioned side tracking the developers have taken. Hence it is similar to RW in that sense. It baffles me in some sense that people would knowingly pay for an Alpha game, and then after playing for awhile, come unto the official forums and start blasting the game for being crap because they expected something more or because they feel its buggy. Fortunately, the community here on RW is rather more tolerant and forgiving compared to those on 7DtD.

[slippy]

Tynan, the fact that there are so many people that may be dissapointed at the thought that you could stop developing for rimworld soon just shows how great of a product you have made.  I forget all that I read regarding your promises for the game when I bought the alpha 1 release and that's fine.  Every update from that point afterwards was bonus. 

Would new content be great?  Of course!  All of us here recognize how much more could be done with rimworld.  What a lot of people may not truly recognize though, is that since you have made this game so modder friendly, modders will really take over when you are done developing.  With that said, get some rest so you can come back;-)

For those who may feel jipped in some fashion just think of the Super Nintendo days.  60 bucks a game.  In those times people read about a video game in a magazine.  They had no input whatsoever towards developement of a game.  Be thankful.  Play outside.  GG!

[picollo]

Looking at this discussion, and I think that I'll add my two cents.

Basically I agree with most of people here. Rimworld is awesome base, but it needs more flesh.
More variety. We have biomes, but only six or so of them.
We have like 6 animals species.
There is not really much of apparels or weapons.
No matter where you land, you will grow food from 4 kinds of plants.
And there is also not too much events.
If you asked me what to do now, I'd say, that Steam release could be much more successfull with one more alpha release before. This time focusing on variety. No new mechanics, no faction relations, no animal husbandry (they would be awesome, but its alot of work), but expand what exists currently.

Add new biomes (maybe something not matching real biomes, but something like biome filled with zerg-like creep, or just strange yellow ground with fantastic plants. It still shoult thematically fit to non-alien universe, but would add variety. And then while generating map, generator should chose x biomes. Not every biome has to appear on every planet.

Add new weapons. Or maybe talk to the modders, and try to integrate some mod added weapons.

More animals, more cloths, more plants.
Make growable plants depending on biomes.

Make events. a lot of them. Biggest changes in A11 were siegers, nuclear fallout, volcanic winter and warg pack. And it added alot of fun to the game. Every one of those events requires you to adapt specific strategy. To go out of your comfort zone, and adapt.  And it is awesome.

I could see game released as v1.0 without new mechanics. But expand what you have. Right now this game is in alpha. And for alpha it is awesome. But for full release it is not enough.

At some point you mentioned that you consider releasing two new versions during holidays, and doing Steam release after you return from break. I think it could be good decision (probably even better than releasing this game now as 1.0).

[NoImageAvailable]

If burnout is the problem, have you considered going on vacation now, followed by a Steam EA release with some more updates to round out the things people have pointed out (faction relations, research, mid- and late-game mechanics, etc.)? Those things really just scream placeholder to me, like they are just there to test/demonstrate the basic mechanic while the rest of the game gets fleshed out some more. I think those things need to be addressed before Rimworld can truly be called a well-rounded game, especially considering the rather steep price point ($40 is in the realm of "professional" studio productions that aren't quite AAA, most Indie games don't charge half that price). And if you still want to add more to the game you could always go ahead and work on things like void gods, colonist relations, etc. which aren't really part of the game right now but would fit well into a future expansion.

[Cdr.Keen]

No true sense of how much content would be in the game when it was finished was ever established, meaning consumers had to make some degree of assumption

Ok, well I agree with the first part of this, however the second part just isn't true. No assumptions about the future need to be made at all. The consumer's best advice is to look at a product as it is today and decide if they want that. If they don't want what's right there in front of them, don't buy. No assumptions needed.

This is being marketed as an alpha release of a game, not a complete game. That is the difference.

If this were being marketed as a complete game already, then I would agree.

Ok. Well we can agree to disagree on this specific point. In any case, I appreciate the thoughts.

at my view, most people mistake "buying into an alpha" for "buying a share". spending the money to a developer and getting into early access does not mean that you buy some power of decision. It's like ordering a dish - if the roundness of a potato does not match to your expectations, you can't blame the cook for chosing it.