Jump to content

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, aidancode said:

I'd be surprised if there wasn't, considering how every other DS game has gone and how Klei basically always operates

Might be funny if the EA started before DST finishes its story. It would be like reverse foreshadowing.

Ea?

I want to sleep and wake up only next week to get more news, I imagine it shouldn't take too long for an early access or something, right? Klei doesn't seem to be a company that announces things too far in advance without any prospect of releasing them; from the releases I've followed, almost all of them were shown when they were in a decent state. Maybe we'll be able to play an early access version soon-ish.

  • Like 5
  • Health 1
  • GL Happy 1
16 hours ago, aidancode said:

I'd be surprised if there wasn't, considering how every other DS game has gone and how Klei basically always operates

Might be funny if the EA started before DST finishes its story. It would be like reverse foreshadowing.

Purely speculation 

But I'd wager there's a 99.9% chance EA starts long before DST finishes it's story 

  • Like 1
15 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

Not for xbox players.

 As an Xbox player I think the new game is the excuse to jump to pc 

Missing mods for DST sucked 

Plus I suspect the new Xbox (the pc hybrid) will probably come out around the same time, or slightly before DSE 1.0 launches 

Just now, Jakepeng99 said:

What’s your reasoning?

Many, not all, early access games are ones that are very static in nature and act more as a live service thing rather than a beta. The nature of allowing players to pay for beta access has become a predatory behavior more often than not. If the game is doing well, updates continue, if the game is not doing well it is abandoned which "abandonware" comes into play. 

Secondly, while I appreciate a lot of aspects of beta testing, allowing anyone and everyone access is pretty disadvantageous since it drowns out more qualified and nuanced feedback and bug reporting. Many developers tend to cater toward player desires over their own design principles. Darkest Dungeon did it well by going against their community with the introduction of corpses, which was almost universally hated at the time, but is an important aspect to preserve the difficulty of the game. Meanwhile other games/companies can focus more on player feelings while ignoring niche mechanical issues with the game. BG3 is a prime example, with numerous, still present combat bugs that have been reported but are always ignored over adding or fixing parts of the game that is more popular among the playerbase (story aspects for BG3).

Lastly, as seen with Rotwood, if a game is just generally not too popular in early access it can be rushed out to move onto the next thing. Updates were slow and the previous update was contested and not well liked by the community. None of it was addressed in the final update and was shadow released just so it was out of Early Access (which is much better than abandonware mind you!). It seemed more like an update/release out of shame rather than excitement.

Having worked in bug testing, I had to filter through player reports to appropriately rephrase them so the developers can resolve them. That is extremely important work so bugs can be properly solved. Player feedback and bug reporting is vital, yes, but there needs to be a filter so that what is important and not important gets relayed to the team so it can be addressed. It is one of the few reasons I am so against players giving out suggestions to fix issues, as those suggestions are more often than not emotional and focused on personal experience rather than what the dev team is aiming for with the experience of their game.

There are pro's and con's of Early Access. With the initial adoption of EA, I think it was good, but over time the negatives have outweighed the positives in my eyes.

(Note: I have made statements that have no reviewed data, so take what I say as anecdotal and a personal opinion rather than a factual statistical argument for or against Early Access.)

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Shopcat 1
17 hours ago, Evelo said:

Many, not all, early access games are ones that are very static in nature and act more as a live service thing rather than a beta. The nature of allowing players to pay for beta access has become a predatory behavior more often than not. If the game is doing well, updates continue, if the game is not doing well it is abandoned which "abandonware" comes into play. 

Secondly, while I appreciate a lot of aspects of beta testing, allowing anyone and everyone access is pretty disadvantageous since it drowns out more qualified and nuanced feedback and bug reporting. Many developers tend to cater toward player desires over their own design principles. Darkest Dungeon did it well by going against their community with the introduction of corpses, which was almost universally hated at the time, but is an important aspect to preserve the difficulty of the game. Meanwhile other games/companies can focus more on player feelings while ignoring niche mechanical issues with the game. BG3 is a prime example, with numerous, still present combat bugs that have been reported but are always ignored over adding or fixing parts of the game that is more popular among the playerbase (story aspects for BG3).

Lastly, as seen with Rotwood, if a game is just generally not too popular in early access it can be rushed out to move onto the next thing. Updates were slow and the previous update was contested and not well liked by the community. None of it was addressed in the final update and was shadow released just so it was out of Early Access (which is much better than abandonware mind you!). It seemed more like an update/release out of shame rather than excitement.

Having worked in bug testing, I had to filter through player reports to appropriately rephrase them so the developers can resolve them. That is extremely important work so bugs can be properly solved. Player feedback and bug reporting is vital, yes, but there needs to be a filter so that what is important and not important gets relayed to the team so it can be addressed. It is one of the few reasons I am so against players giving out suggestions to fix issues, as those suggestions are more often than not emotional and focused on personal experience rather than what the dev team is aiming for with the experience of their game.

There are pro's and con's of Early Access. With the initial adoption of EA, I think it was good, but over time the negatives have outweighed the positives in my eyes.

(Note: I have made statements that have no reviewed data, so take what I say as anecdotal and a personal opinion rather than a factual statistical argument for or against Early Access.)

I agree with you now, excellent points.

I hope they do a closed beta then. Maybe you need a certain amount of dst hours to get in, and you are allowed to invite two friends regardless of their play time. Maybe this system would be ok.

The invite two friends thing is so they can see how new players interact.

  • Like 2
13 minutes ago, Jakepeng99 said:

I agree with you now, excellent points.

I hope they do a closed beta then. Maybe you need a certain amount of dst hours to get in, and you are allowed to invite two friends regardless of their play time. Maybe this system would be ok.

The invite two friends thing is so they can see how new players interact.

 i would worry that people who wanted to get into the beta but didn't would make complaints about favourtism, bias and general unspecified bigotry within klei if someone who wasn't them and didn't have "enough" credential to "earn" getting into the beta was able to. 

  • Like 3
2 hours ago, gaymime said:

 i would worry that people who wanted to get into the beta but didn't would make complaints about favourtism, bias and general unspecified bigotry within klei if someone who wasn't them and didn't have "enough" credential to "earn" getting into the beta was able to. 

I was thinking it just checks your steam play time.

5 hours ago, Jakepeng99 said:

I hope they do a closed beta then. Maybe you need a certain amount of dst hours to get in, and you are allowed to invite two friends regardless of their play time. Maybe this system would be ok.

Nah this would make problems, i think the beta(if we get one) should be open to everyone or choose random people, maybe giving big creators a key so they can play it and show it to the comunity idk, but selecting people based on hours in steam only is a big no.

  • Like 2
1 hour ago, Jakepeng99 said:

They have never done betas on console.

Is that because they did not want to or simply because technology at the time did not allow it back then?

Im in the Minecraft Preview it is a separate app from the regular Minecraft, Preview gets builds of In-Progess Beta features in testing before going to the live version of the game later.

ALSO there’s the “Game Preview” tab on Xbox live which lets people buy incomplete work in progress games that may change overtime or never even fully release outside of preview at all. 

I would LOVE to be one of the people who got to run Xbox tests for Elsewhere, even if I had to agree to some very heavy NDA contracts before Klei would send me the early access versions.

thats probably never going to happen.. 😂

4 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

Is that because they did not want to or simply because technology at the time did not allow it back then?

Im in the Minecraft Preview it is a separate app from the regular Minecraft, Preview gets builds of In-Progess Beta features in testing before going to the live version of the game later.

ALSO there’s the “Game Preview” tab on Xbox live which lets people buy incomplete work in progress games that may change overtime or never even fully release outside of preview at all. 

I would LOVE to be one of the people who got to run Xbox tests for Elsewhere, even if I had to agree to some very heavy NDA contracts before Klei would send me the early access versions.

thats probably never going to happen.. 😂

I mean tbh betas on Xbox would be a big waste of time and resources.

Minecraft has a much bigger Xbox playerbase, and has Microsoft.

1 hour ago, Jakepeng99 said:

I mean tbh betas on Xbox would be a big waste of time and resources.

Minecraft has a much bigger Xbox playerbase, and has Microsoft.

nnnnnnooo?? if they intend to release on xbox then it is important to know what is and is not viable on the platform....not being minecraft is hardly a justifiable reason

  • Like 1
6 hours ago, gaymime said:

nnnnnnooo?? if they intend to release on xbox then it is important to know what is and is not viable on the platform....not being minecraft is hardly a justifiable reason

They can’t do hotfixes as fast because microsoft. They can still do controller support on PC so it doesn’t seem nessisary to do xbox

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
  • Create New...