Revised (estimated) delivery date

My apologies for not including the "deeply" adverb in my statement of commitment. Please do not construe that verbiage omission as a measurement of our commitment.

I know it has been a while since our last update about plans for single player and we will try to do better but meanwhile what I posted here is still the plan.

 

Madly, truly, deeply...

Come on, romance us a little. Stare into our eyes... ;-)

 

Try something stronger. I hear the dev team prefers whiskey in the morning to start the day.

Actually, that unique offline features thread has a ton of questions regarding mechanics and gameplay balancing that can only be tested in offline mode. But yeah, I don't think anyone wants to see the story-based elements before launch. It's mainly about all the other things in that thread...for which I still have a thousand questions to ask but am holding back until at least some of those are addressed.

I think many of us in IRC will also continue to "panic" and make grandiose hyperbole whenever we catch the devs doing that

Thanks for clarifying that. Looking forward to pseudo-offline mode, please

 

Hm. OK, well I am forced to admit I had forgotten about this thread. I retract my earlier statement. Thanks for the reminder (but I still think we should test companions in combat soon )

 

So it begs to be asked, I have the assumption a single player game is easier to produce then in depth multi player/sandbox, why not finish a single player campaign first? If you have the basic of the game done, surely a bit of story, some quests

Im asking purely from a technical point and despite my attitude towards development this is honestly out of curiosity.

 

When building tech you want to get the concept plan done first so that you don't have to redo the design.
Such concept plans are always better if they take the most complex scenario into consideration, again otherwise you need to redo it later on.
If you have a valid such concept plan on how to 'evolve' a function iteratively then you can even set milestones and such of where you need to go, where you want to go and what you could envision.

So starting with the simplest scenario will inevitably lead to more work. This since you are taking deadend shortcuts.


You don't want to start making a prototype and then halfway through the process realize you need a larger battery due to new features draining it faster. Instead knowing the features you plan you could design the prototype with a larger battery initially.

In a game like SotA then making single player experience you'd have to take those deadend shortcuts all the time due to missing functionality. Want a quest item to follow the quest but that scene isn't done yet - needs deadend spawner of quest item. Want anNPC companion dialog but NPC who can follow you around and fight isn't done yet - needs a deadend pet handler. Wnat a save function but the content of a local client state cache isn't done yet - needs deadend maintenance of save states. etc

You can still see such deadend shortcuts in the game just because they want to showcase and test some of these single player experience type of things. Like in the Solace Bridge start, Lum had to add two Edvard NPCs since the tech to let him follow you while you fight the skeletons isn't there. That is a typical example of deadend shortcuts, all that work on having that extra NPC is a waste to showcase the idea.

 

Ok sweet so basically the game currently isnt anywhere near functioning/working properly yet? Still alot of technical shortfalls to address?

Are these Unity limitations or something else?

 

So you are not playing? Nope that is not what I was saying, and no, its not about Unity.
I will let this one slide due to the audience but still could you try to exlude me from your crusade...

Have you experience or any clue about how software development works in agile/scrum? Otherwise this is gonna take a while to get you up to basics.

Now to answer your direct question(s):
I'd say that almost all base infrastructure tech is in place.
It's the playability feature tech that is not all in place.


Let's take NPCs as an example.
The concept design was very clear on deliverables. There was a long list both in the public sphere on what they intended for NPCs and an even longer list in the private sphere. So the design requirements was that list of "what do we want them to do". That then was then boiled down to tech ideas and requirements of what the tech needed to support. Fast forward a bit.
From R8-9-10 something there was fully fleshed out NPCs in the game. You could talk to them and get responses. Keywords could trigger keywords on other NPCs to create complex quest lines. Trigger keys could hand out or check for objects and/or remove/add them from/to the player. In short it was already in a playable state for conversations and questlines. In some games that would have been it, but the list was longer.

So then we had a release R10-R11 something where they tested the next feature set which was NPC items lists of buying/selling. At his point to trial the systems and loads everything you sold to an NPC would stay on that NPC. So every crappy thing ever sold would stack up in huge lists. In the reverse all the items the NPC would have to sell would soon be depleted. So the farmer NPCs would have no foodstuff but instead just have player loot etc.
Then in a patch they put in scene timers were they would clean out vendors and/or restock them. With the tech tested and vetted they started removing all nonsense stuff players would sell.
They then switched from a hard limit to a soft encouragement where you can now sell anything to any NPC merchant but they pay half of what the proper merchant of that type would.
Then in a later release they implemented and tested price increases due to popularity. So for a while in Owl's Head - the village lot deeds would cost almost twice that of a town lot deed (and players would still buy them). Having tested and vetted that they removed that.
Then in a later release the NPCs who used to be stationary, started moving around.
Then in a later release the NPCs started closing doors and turning lamps on/off.
....later... getting schedules depending on time of day.
...detect close by seats and sit down.
... adding trading windows for quest items.
...a Grand tour hat quest triggereing a new resource being gatherable, which you can then turn in in enough quantaties to end the questline.
etc
etc
Now someone not paying attention can and will get very frustrated that they change behavior from release to release. Like why would the popular price increase in one relesae but not in the next? Or why would they have limited supply of items between scene resets in one but in the next you just re-open the window to restock? Like where did my trader go, it used to be always behind that counter and now I find it in the tavern next door just sitting there. Etc.
However someoen paying attention would see each feature set for new functionality implemented, tested and vetted. So that the list of playability features for NPCs grows ever longer and longer.

Which brings us to Story and single player. Once the tech feature list has been implemented, tested and vetted. Then you can put a junior developer on 'filling' the story line arcs. That junior then has a relatively easy job of adding stuff from the now developed NPC toolbox. Maybe this one is only up at night sneaking around the graveyard? Fine, use the schedule tool, put in the hours. Maybe it should be taking cover behind objects and turn off ligths? Fine, use the tool for action triggers. Maybe it should end its nightly tasks by going to a location? fine use the pahtfinder tool. Maybe then a different NPC should get restocked? Fine, use the triggered restock tool. Maybe that NPC gets random number of stock and should sell for incresing prices if running low? Fine, use the dynamic price tool.
Now that junior developer could relatively easily create very complex chains of a nightly graverobber getting corpse wax to a local merchant with varied pricing depending on supply. So now there could be emergent gameplay when players notice that if they distract (in any number off different ways) the graverobber the local price of corpse wax goes up.
Maybe the 'non virtuous' storyline then can progress with the merchant asking the player to find a new supplier for them.

Without the original feature request list, the tech implementation, the iterative testing, then that junior developers job would have to be much more liniar, senior and it would have taken several NPC redesigns to get everything working.
But now they can just "fill" the world with content.

 

What about deeply belittling?

I'm all for people being passionate and giving feedback. But if we're going to be collaborative, then we're not going to be in a position where the only solutions are to do X and nothing else.

I think reagents should be required for all spells.
I think the combat system is trash because it's built on DPS.
I think auto-attack is a horrible mechanic that favors twitch gamers and macroers.

I could really go on and on. But I realize that the development team has to consider more than just my single wants and desires when it comes to making this game. I also realize that whatever solutions I propose could be great, but might not always be the only way to accomplish the same goal.

So despite my many posts arguing my points or being unsettled by the current direction in some of these areas, I don't believe I call the development team out for a lack of caring or having some secret agenda. Even in cases like "stealth mechanics" where I'm pretty sure whoever designed the current system may completely hate stealth, I leave room for the development team to "make things right" as they iterate on the existing model.

I don't always see that from the "single player" folks. In fact, there are a few posters that seem determined to be upset about the single player experience regardless of what's going on. And although I agree that "what's going on" may not always be communicated well. It has absolutely been communicated (SEVERAL TIMES) that during this development process the single player game will not be something that goes in until the very end - that's why you've never been able to get to single player mode.

Since that's the reality, why are people that are focused mainly on single player features continuing to be so argumentative? You get to wait, that's it. That's really the only reasonable thing to do. We don't need 10,000 comments like "single player original kickstarter blah blah blah". Because it's not just annoying, it's wrong. It's not constructive feedback. I want Christmas morning to be here soon too, which is essentially what these people keep saying. That and, "Santa probably won't bring me what I want. I'm probably going to get nothing but coal." People need to grow up.

 

Spoon provided a nice and detailed answer. To put it simply yes the single player game is "easier" however if we did it first it would have to be completely done over to make it work on top of the multiplayer framework which would double the work load.

 

Really.

This is what you typed? What do you expect people to say here?

Could they go on about how there isn't nearly 10000 comments and that PVP threads pop all the time and you don't see the great "barons" jumping in on them., matter of fact they usually start or are part of them.

The comments that came up today were a result of some information that was not communicated clearly.

I bolded the paragraph where I thought you said something incredibly dismissive and one of the reasons we have a divide in this game. You obviously have no idea what people are saying and you're trying to curtail it in by referring to those as infantile is completely off base.

I'm not quitting....I can only speak for myself in this.

I could say a lot more but I don't think it would make a difference, as you have made it quite clear what you believe.

 

Just hope we have sensitivity training available in-game, and in the forum. Devs, please make it so.

Edit: Sensitivity trainer now located in Ardoris. Next to the Oracle, of course.

 

I expect people to say the same thing they have been saying for two years. I want single player, only single player, and everything I hear or read that is not single player I'm going to throw a fit about.

This is unfair to people that are not throwing a fit, but it's completely 100% on point for the people that are. I'm not in anyway saying that single player is not deserving of discussion or that it shouldn't be discussed. However I am saying that a few people keep bringing it up as if 1. The game was originally only a single player game (that's false) 2. The developers don't want a robust single player game (that's debatable but we will not know until we know) 3.That somehow any mechanic or feature worked on for multiplayer can't also be leveraged for single player (that's false). 4. Somehow complaining about single player not getting enough "love" is going to make a better single player game (that's false).

But yeah, I expect people to continue saying what they've been saying for the last two years.

 

Didn't see anyone throwing a fit, care to show that?

 

Well, since that's not going to happen...

 

Spoon , sometimes you are scary. You are not a Spoon anymore - for me you are a

Spoon, you are a Monocle for me.

 

Only when reading threads like this implying all the work my team is doing isn't going to be in the game!

 

If we shipped with "a bit of story and some quests", I think this thread alone is enough evidence that we would justifiably be flayed alive.

From a technical aspect, there are many things that are worked on concurrently (friendly NPC AI for example), but there is also quite a bit that needs to be developed independently (see the thread of features committed to that Starr linked earlier).

From a *content* standpoint - there is a LOT of work to be done. Spoon's post did a masterful job of summarizing.

 

No, the game is still in pre-alpha early access and in very active development. It's literally not done yet. If you are looking for a complete game, you should come back later.

 

ROFL