
jorb wrote:DeathToSuperman wrote:do you think everyone's just being unreasonable, or what?
Not at all. I think there are a lot of valid complaints and making necessary adjustments will be a top priority on monday.
Fharlanghn wrote:DeathToSuperman wrote: Do you think when a developer says that, we are assured that the quality of the game will be fine?
To be fair, the developers don't contribute much to the quality of the game. The community is what does it.
As for Jorb's blasé affectation, you now know why so many games have a community manager rather than a direct line to the developers themselves. There's something offputting about the personality of a person who can and will create something like this.
Ragnar214 wrote:To be fair!?
AHAHA
Did you make the game?
My God.
Ragnar214 wrote:Fharlanghn wrote:DeathToSuperman wrote: Do you think when a developer says that, we are assured that the quality of the game will be fine?
To be fair, the developers don't contribute much to the quality of the game. The community is what does it.
As for Jorb's blasé affectation, you now know why so many games have a community manager rather than a direct line to the developers themselves. There's something offputting about the personality of a person who can and will create something like this.
To be fair!?
AHAHA
Did you make the game?
My God.
Jesus_Smith_Nandez wrote:Jezz loise Jorbtar just make your fucking game a 20$ single purchase with a demo and stop being arrogent about what your game is worth. The wole appeal of old Haven came with that it was a super neat idea and was free. A neat idea is worth 20$, not a subscription.
Haven as a game lends itself much better to a single purchase anyway. I don't want to be buying a months worth of game time to refill curios and see if anything interesting happened every few days. At that point I'd just quit, because the sub is no longer worth it.
jorb wrote:wazave wrote:jorb, its actually madness that ALPHA version with low budget where are working 2 people so far cost THIS 15$ PER MONTH!
I could easily argue that our situation is exactly why you should pay us more than a big name developer. I've asked this before, but would it be helpful to your understanding of our situation if we wrote "Kickstarter" instead of "Store" up there?
Why would you want to pay more for a game that is doing fine and arguably doesn't need the extra money, especially when the correlation between derived pleasure and budget is everything but linear? Does it not make more sense to support the indie:er game?
jorb wrote:The game does not cost $15 per month. Read through the store page. One month subscription is $10 and you get a silly hat to boot. Move up to a full year and you get as low as $6 and another silly hat. You can certainly argue that even that might be too much, but could we please have our facts straight?
jorb wrote:We did not expect this level of controversy over the store, and we are, I'm sure, going to tinker with it.
Take a deep breath.
jorb wrote:Also, million bugs and crashes? I have about had it with this bullshit.
After two years of closed development we've had maybe 10-15 or so crashes since a deluge of players descended upon us and our completely untested server like locusts over the Pharaoh's Egypt. The fact that the server is as of this writing chugging along pretty darn well, handling 800+ players, and having intermittent uptimes of several hours, is nothing save an eternal testament to the genius that is loftar's coding.
jorb wrote:Yes. There are a couple of bugs. Most of them are either obscure or occurring under system conditions that we have not tested ourselves. I am sure they will be addressed eventually. Welcome to computer game development.
DeathToSuperman wrote:I didn't completely agree with his post, but Ragnar, the truth is that in H&H community is a major factor in the game.
Users browsing this forum: BLEX [Bot], Claude [Bot] and 1 guest