I pretty much agree with @Brocephus about the "circle menu"... this is an abomination of a mechanic I was not even a little tempted to use (this will work with pad better I guess).
I'm not sure it matters what they were planning to do, the planning ship has sailed a long ago - as long as they work on features and fixes that people who play their game want now, and there are enough of them to keep them busy for a long time. They don't need visions at this point, the game is done.
The problem with unwelcome features may be an internal Taleworlds problem: first, some dev who doesn't play the game has a "bright" idea, then he goes before the Armagan committee and somehow gets it approved, and then he implements it. The problem is when the players overwhelmingly respond that the new feature sucks. Now the same guy should again go before the Armagan committee to get permission to remove the feature and admit his idea sucked. That guy may want to avoid looking bad at all costs and instead would try to "improve" the idea by some change, even if removing it is the best. We've seen this happen.
Obviously it would be better if the devs are more free to make changes, and that includes changing stuff back. At the same time, they need to be overseen not by some distant person who is busy with a space game, but by someone who reads player feedback and can tell if a change is good or bad.
The most surprising thing this year for me was their sudden announcement of regional battle maps. Nobody asked for it. The terrain maps as they are now are supposedly adequate if somewhat repetitive, so it was not something that needed their attention (unlike siege maps or keep scenes for example).
But someone in TW decided it's a cool idea (it is) despite the huge effort of producing 100+ maps that closely resemble regional features of the world map. It's the effort that gets me. Who approved a major task like this and why? And in the middle of EA, when they are scrambling to fix crashes and bugs every day. It's such a wasteful decision and nobody asked for it. And they still have to show any sign of progress, it's 3 months since it was announced and shown in a video.
If you think this is a toxic rant, I have a message for you and it is about flowers.
The problem with unwelcome features may be an internal Taleworlds problem: first, some dev who doesn't play the game has a "bright" idea, then he goes before the Armagan committee and somehow gets it approved, and then he implements it. The problem is when the players overwhelmingly respond that the new feature sucks. Now the same guy should again go before the Armagan committee to get permission to remove the feature and admit his idea sucked. That guy may want to avoid looking bad at all costs and instead would try to "improve" the idea by some change, even if removing it is the best. We've seen this happen.
The most surprising thing this year for me was their sudden announcement of regional battle maps. Nobody asked for it. The terrain maps as they are now are supposedly adequate if somewhat repetitive, so it was not something that needed their attention (unlike siege maps or keep scenes for example).
Great example - almost forgot about (months it is months...) It is a cool idea that was announced some time ago like it is days before they release it...
The problem with unwelcome features may be an internal Taleworlds problem: first, some dev who doesn't play the game has a "bright" idea, then he goes before the Armagan committee and somehow gets it approved, and then he implements it.
My view of TW based on comments of devs here and other employees in glassdoor:
Someone (Armagan?) gives a task to a developer to implement a feature with very vague requirements, the dev works for months developing it guessing what someone (Armagan?) has in mind. When he tough it is ready ask to do a demo of the new feature to someone (Armagan?) and it is rejected or approved in 10 sec meeting.
Feedback/suggestion meetings are held once per month and you have just few minutes to explain why you think 'whatever' is interesting before being rejected/approved.
Someone (Armagan?) view is to delegate as much as possible to the AI and do not allow the player micromanage anything.
They don't publish a roadmap because there is not a clear roadmap. Features are included/rejected 'on the fly'
Release cycles are very long... pushing something to production is really hard.
No because this is not RPG but strange, grindy and empty sandbox battle simulator... Just finish it in this state so the mods can rule them all - SP/MP.
I've been thinking about creating a thread where players can list 5 things that they would like to see made a priority. Then conduct a poll based upon the list that comes out of that. At least then we have an objective measurement of what the community sees as a priority.
I'm between the 3rd and 4th choice. They should take into account feedback but the people who give feedback don't necessarily reflect player preferences in general. They have to prioritize with consideration for the process of actually implementing with what they've got to work with, not what players wish they had to work with.
Sometimes a new feature is also something you might not have thought you wanted but once it's there it's great and ties other features together or gives them new application.
I've been thinking about creating a thread where players can list 5 things that they would like to see made a priority. Then conduct a poll based upon the list that comes out of that. At least then we have an objective measurement of what the community sees as a priority.
Thanks for bringing that up.. It somehow died from natural causes. Dejan mentioned something it will be reviewed internally. But i feel like there is no hope for feedback
There are very good threads taking dust and it certainly giggles and saddens me in equal parts because we have already seen like 4 or 5 cycles of threads pointing out the same problems or providing the same idea quite a lot times suggested, since the closed alpha-beta period (June 2019-March 2020) + post release period.
Thanks for bringing that up.. It somehow died from natural causes. Dejan mentioned something it will be reviewed internally. But i feel like there is no hope for feedback
I'm kinda ambivalent about being too prescriptive towards the devs- game development is complicated and I don't think we should prioritize what the community wants over any outstanding low-hanging-fruit. For example, the AI obviously has a lot of problems, but I don't think that because the AI has problems they shouldn't add new maps or optimize load times or etc. Often times problems like that are big and complex and it's good to spend some time on other things that could maybe get fixed sooner. Plus, taking a break from one problem can often help you come back to it with a renewed interest or insight instead of being frustrated about it.
That said I really do hope the AI and diplomacy are the main priorities internally! They're the only things that often directly get in the way of me enjoying the game at times.
Well, let me just say I am not a huge fan of how TW has been handling the EA so far, and I was not, and still am not a fan of the heir system. I despise the heir system and have waited since release date for an official year length slider. Needless to say none of the thing TW did since impressed me. None, what so ever.
But let's be fair, TW is never gonna do things according to the community's suggestions. They are doing things their way, and that is driven by what they think will make them the most money. You have all paid for this game, a year length slider is not gonna make them more money, console ports will.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
