Whining about the game constantly and destructively will never help us the players to get what we want, this is true, but not understanding why people are mad and claiming there is a lot to do in the game is just ridiculous.
Well that's easy to explain: The Vision(tm). It was all over Duh's responses here. Fixing those problems we've been complaining about for a year just isn't part of The Vision(tm).So, Taleworlds' employees seem to be a fairly good number and well allocated. The question is why time gets wasted on things nobody asked for, while problems which the playerbase has been complaining about for a year remain unfixed.
This is a very good and succinct way of putting it.I just wanted to know why a paid EA if they were sticking with a closed Alpha mindset in terms of feedback.
I made the connection because in my case (being a big big fan of Paradox games), one *does* necessarily lead to another. If I have high confidence in Paradox, I'm buying whatever they put out. Your other point makes sense, however. It only seems to apply to the whole "toxicity" thing though and not to whether or not I should have enough confidence in Paradox to buy the product. Devs working in good faith means nothing for product quality if management and the C-suite isn't also working in good faith (which it's pretty clear they aren't if they approved a release in this state).Technically it's the act of buying it that's costing you money, not the assuming part. One leads to another for sure, but not necessarily. Paradox is a scummy company, but the devs and whoever is making those DLC decisions are not the same people. I believe that Archangel85 guy meant "good faith" on the devs, as people naturally want to do a good job (true), just unable to do so sometimes.
Agreed on the "contribution" thing you mention. I'd hope for completeness's sake this is in the backlog somewhere, but I doubt it's anywhere even in the top 1000 issues to be dealt with.Honestly, this kind of feedback is just irritating. It's such a meaningless non-issue but people blow it up just because they think they're smart for noticing it. In my years as a developer I've seen this attitude a lot. People will point out a button that's slightly off-center or a color that looks a little too bright just to "contribute" to the meeting.
What do people think of this?
Paradox developers are tired of dealing with a culture "that is not enjoyable to take part in."www.pcgamer.com
Is it a similar situation on here?
Just posting it here because I don't want to make a thread about it.
ye old reliable from before our more enlightened modern era of regression tests. the only way this still happens is if you don't have regression tests.You do know ye old realiable, right?
100 lines of bugs in the code, 100 lines of bugs
take one down
patch it around
216 lines of bug in the code!
I'm a software developer and I can tell you it's not normal. Not in the slightest. Their current roadmap being as vague as it is this late in the process absolutely SCREAMS disfunction from a game design/management standpoint. When half of your points are "improve <x>" then you're almost assuredly flying by the seat of your pants.Then again im not a software developer so my layman's vieuw on it has no actual grasp of how difficult it is but I dont think its normal in the industry for this 'stage' of development to take this long...
Compare them to the mods over on the Paradox forums who will ban you at the slightest indication that you're putting some oomph into your criticism (and not phrasing your feedback in a "pls Paradox oh Great and Mighty Ones I a lowly peasant user have a humble request" tone) and it's wonderful here (even if there are an order of magnitude more white knights here).Forum moderators are volunteers recruited from forum users. They work for TW, but they are not TW - they are people like us.
TW gives them a pretty free hand and they know why. A couple of times in the past TW devs (who had automatic moderator powers) tried to interfere and punish or censor someone, and the forum rose up in arms, supporting moderator independence. TW backed off.