Tikigit

Registered Users
  • Content count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Tikigit

  • Rank
    Junior Member

Badges

Oxygen Not Included
  • Alpha Contributor
  1. And there are MUCH better ways to handle that than just deciding to go back on something they decided to sell because it was more successful than they predicted. Take Clockwork Empires operated by Gaslamp for example (Before the disaster release state which was for a whole totally different set of reasons). There was: 1) The public Early Access builds released monthly with critical bug fixes only. 2) The opt-in Experimental branch with typically weekly (sometimes more often) builds of WIP things that would eventually become the stable branch monthly build when ready. Which gave people the chance to voice input on new concepts, balance changes, how things like progression pacing was impacted, UI usability and such before such changes were further fleshed out. But also was unstable and could often introduce utterly game breaking oversights. 3) A closed branch available only to certain members of the community who had shown the ability to provide constructive feedback even if it was negatively critical when needed. That got the unstable of the unstable and poked and prodded builds really not suitable for larger exposure, some of which either didn't make it to experimental even, or did so somewhat later. They didn't go "Oh, we want to do #3 so, as a result, we'll stop our existing cases of #1 and #2 and to hell with everyone that's bought into what we advertised... but let's keep selling it of course!". No. They worked out a structure to do all 3 concurrently (I hear there are these magical tools that allow you to do things like branch off repositories and migrate bug fixes and more stable changes from the most recent branch into other branches... but shhh they're super magical top secret tools). And that's a relatively small team where there were about 4 active members of the actual development team (CEO/Programmer, Main programmer, Lead artist, QA) constantly communicating on forums both their own official boards and the Steam boards on a daily basis, doing bi-weekly in-depth dev blogs, and managing 3 different development branches and sticking to their outlined structure for a good 3-4 years. What Klei did very much just comes across as deciding not to bother to come up with a practical solution. Instead opting to drum up some justification about "It will negatively impact the games image" for why keeping to what they offered everyone wasn't going to happen in any guise and did something that I'd quite honestly expect more from a studio like 22Cans than a group like Klei. If they can't react sensibly and positively to getting more interest and support than they had expected and instead pull out of delivering something they constantly kept selling the entire time, then I don't really know how Early Access for this project can end well, or how much of anything said or presented can be taken seriously. :\
  2. Yeah, that's sort of BS when they're actually packaging "Alpha Access" as a purchasable period with a roadmap mentioning frequent bug fixes, and 4-5 week content updates. That they actually operated without problems for a month before deciding "Screw the Alpha Access purchasers. Let's just pick a few favourites from OUR forums, and just ****can the rest of the Alpha we've sold people.". You can try to spin it and point blame for not "having got involved in the community and made yourself known", but I along with thousands of others supported Klei financially for Alpha access, got involved over on the Steam discussion boards which Klei largely ignore to the point of not posting update notes or even sharing information about build streams.... only to then get shafted in behaviour that frankly anyone but the ignorantly supportive would be critical of, purely because... what... we didn't post enough on another forum and Klei decided on second thought they'd just take the Alpha access income and cancel the Alpha involvement after a month?
  3. There hasn't been an Alpha backer update since Thermal. Klei figured Alpha backers didn't need Alpha anymore after Thermal over a month ago and decided we could be put in the closet until Early Access launched. Instead, they picked a few select members of this specific forum and gave only them access to the rest of the Alpha as I guess too many of us gave them money to be involved in Alpha or something and as such we couldn't be given Alpha?
  4. Personally I would have much rather have liked to have seen Alpha backers get access to the Alpha again before todays EA release, as a sign of Kleis 'Appreciation'. Kinda sucked that after the first month, Klei took a smaller group to give access to the latest alpha and cut the rest of the Alpha backers out of the process.... in fact it more than kinda sucked, it felt like a rather large "<bleep> you. We got the money now so go sit in that corner and shut up until we're ready to try to get more exposure."