Kittysong wrote: My concern was the lackluster response to the community's concerns it show lack of planning and management.
What was lackluster about it? Sure, they admit to a failure to plan, and anyone who's been around has known about some of the management decisions and designs have been... less than ideal. It's a couple of guys building a game from nothing (and for nothing until August) out of their home. If you want to get EA level customer service, look to EA published games. Then again, they probably have the crappiest CS team in the business over time, only to be bested recently by Ubisoft. Jorb and loftar have always been very prompt in responding to customer service issues from my experience, and I've been "working with" them for close to four years now.
I really don't know what more you want out of them. Just remember what the public starts thinking when devs start making promises and airing wishful thinking that they can't deliver on. (If you don't know what I'm referring to, look up Peter Molyneux and pretty much anything he's made since the last Populous games.)
Kittysong wrote:also the whole "failure to heed such warnings really is on the individual's shoulders" is like saying "your fault in investing in this" not the best way of wording things when looking for investors.
Legally, when you invest in stocks, you're told exactly this because, at least in the US, the law requires the investment firms to tell you that stocks fail in tremendous and spectacular ways, and they succeed in such ways, too. Does it stop people investing? No. Why should I or anyone else telling you that this game is in alpha and that the player is ultimately responsible for the commitment of their time (and any fees submitted to play the game) bad wording? You are ultimately responsible for any decisions you make. unless you can prove the devs are doing something illegal, you probably don't have much recourse other than to quit playing.
I'm not saying to quit playing, but if the persistence of your characters or time invested into the game or some "ideal" homogeneity of the game world is necessary to your subscription, you will be disappointed at some point in the future.
Kaios wrote:MagicManICT wrote:It's not like people weren't walking around with q200 bone saws to make boards in a q90 kiln before at two months in.
So you want to go back to that then? The pace was slow, for sure, it needed an increase but not to this extent. I mined after they nerfed the extreme high quality to their adjusted formula and it seemed just right to me, which would have been perfect in combination with the other changes.
Come on man we didn't go with a roll back because of all the people against it but as you can see...
Honestly, I'm not 100% sure. Given the qualities I've heard of from bears, I don't want to think what the trolls will look like. However, this isn't a game breaking development, and should be treated as such. I can understand being concerned, but the level of drama warrants a 5-7 at most, not an 8-10 I've been reading.
Kaios wrote:uncleseano wrote:What was the big issue with the patch?
...most of them don't even understand what's going on.
Maybe someone can explain it properly?
@Pricing: We all see millions of people people drop $60 for a game they won't even get 20-30 hours of play time out of. How much have you already played this with all the bugs and other issues?
Opinions expressed in this statement are the authors alone and in no way reflect on the game development values of the actual developers.
by simimi » Sat Nov 07, 2015 3:38 am 
