Why are my fellow avatars making the case for closed development?

I think that you're assuming that they're experience is based on the amount of money they paid is not correct.

In my case, there's nothing in the last 6 months (or ever) that has had to do with the amount of money I've spent. If anything, the vast majority of my time is spent doing exactly what people that spent $45 would do. Explore, Grind, PVP, Craft.

 

I think the constructive approach would be to state your intent in the opening post. I also think the style and language of your post is not conducive to making any of the angry people less angry.

 

never ever has a forum post with good intentions helped ventilate another angry post.

Dont start onthat road...it will not make you happy. Tell them to go outside for 5 minutes...breath in, breath out...think of the karate kid...and then it should be better.

 

That's a fair observation.

As for the angry people, I have to say that it's been my experience that they're going to continue to be angry regardless of what anyone says, preciously because they're angry people (that's their default mode). I was intent on reaching the people on the margins, those people are less angry and perhaps more disappointed. My hope would be that they see this post and think "maybe I don't need to be like THOSE guys, maybe that's not very constructive".

 

I'd be curious to know what you think might pacify these people.

 

But you are not going to tell me that the single player (offline) part of SotA is fun to play or feels like a single player RPG?

Sure everyone has his own vision and as you say even if SotA would be a single-player game only there would be disagreements. Still, announcing a game as a "basically soloplayer experience akin to Ultima 4-7" with the option to play online should lead to a single-player experience that is similar to Ultima 4-7 don't you agree? And just offering an offline mode that plays like a offline MMORPG is not a single-player experience like Ultima 4-7. At least not for me.

 

I would be a horrible person to make that judgement, Lord Darkmoon.

1. Although I've played many single player RPG's (just about everything other than Ultimas) I've never played an Ultima in my life.
2. I'm not planning on playing the single player mode of this game.

However, as I've stated to you before. I don't see a lot of Single Player Online folks actually taking part in the development process. I don't see a lot of bug reports. I don't see a lot of ACTIONABLE feedback. I just see a lot of complaining and repetitive commentary that is very critical of the inclusion of other game features (POTs, PVP, EMOTES, just to name a few).

You won't find any posts from me saying how Single Player Offline should or shouldn't be, but you will find me making feedback and bug reports about multiplayer. I understand that many players that are very passionate about the single player offline game being very robust, they don't want to "ruin the story" for themselves, and that's completely understandable. But from my point of view, what I see is a lot of people standing around the kitchen saying "that soup better be perfect!" yet not participating beyond the demand for perfection.

I don't think that's the right way to go about getting what you want. In fact, I believe it's a huge missed opportunity because this development team is really good at listening to ACTIONABLE feedback.

 

Well "these people" is a slightly problematic designator because "these people" are all individuals and I can only answer in general terms. I also cannot claim to speak for "these people", only give you my understanding of where they're coming from based on my past interactions with some of those that BDF appears to be referring to in his OP.

Some of them will never now be appeased. Their distrust of Portalarium or the community around the game is so great that any attempt at reconciliation would be viewed with suspicion.

Some people could be appeased but (in my view) the things that would appease them are unlikely to ever happen (e.g. full loot PVP).

Some people will be appeased by better communication over time (both official and unofficial) and/or the feature they've been waiting for finally getting implemented.

I don't think any of them will be appeased by the argument that they're wrong to feel the way they do or want the things they want.

 

Baron Fondorlatus; Your post here lists a point of view shared by many yet does not in my opinion get to the root of what I perceive is the problem.

So here we are, many of us have spent a lot of money from the beginning of Kickstarter to the now proposed SeedInvest. I am one of those that only purchased the adventurer pledge and maybe spent a total of $100.00 dollars between the pledge and other things bought in the add on store. To those that spent far more investing in POT's etc I laud you for your commitment yet we and I include all of us in the we part are either part of the problem or part of the solution. We can either complain about what was promised or be proactive in the process.

I read a comment from @Chris about the two year proposal he is working on which I assume will be released to all of us in the near future. I am assuming that is what can realistically be put in via the following several releases due to their budget and manpower constraints. Now as I just stated in the previous paragraph we CAN be part of the solution and here is my suggestion:

1) @Chris, Can we have some input on the two year plan by stating the top three things we would like implemented?

2) Will you meaning Portalarium entertain mods pertaining to appearance of NPC's Player appearance (This could save some of the devs valuable time and those whose mods are approved could be rewarded with Store Credit and maybe a fancy title?).

These are just a few of my suggestions to be part of the solution. I will gladly open a positive thread on this if you wish. In my 41 years of public service (20 with U.S. Air Force and 21 with Department of Defense I have put out my share of "Fires" with a common sense approach.

R/Boris/El Pirata

 

Yes, there should be more constructive feedback from others. I already wrote some threads with - which I think - constructive feedback, but nothing happened...

For example:

https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...-of-rpgs-and-not-even-sota-comes-close.90555/
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/reddit.91467/#post-822590
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...a-needs-to-be-a-true-single-player-rpg.40168/

 

I personally would like the combat system to be almost turn based, for balance reasons.
I personally would like the magic system to be more like D&D because it would make mages few and far between and I think that would be really cool!
I personally would enjoy it if there was zero grinding in the game and we found another way to obtain power, that did not involve "time".

But for a number of reasons outside of my control, these things will never happen. Not because Portalarium is trying to make a subpar game, but because they're trying to support many different playing styles and many different systems and gaming modes simultaneously. And we knew during the Kickstarter that this would be the case. We knew there would be a single player offline, online, friends only and multiplayer mode, and we knew that the plan was to support all of them.

So when faced with the realities of what this game is and isn't, of the decisions the devs have made and haven't made....I have tried my best to move on past my many feelings about what would make the game better for ME, and attempted to focus on what would make the game better overall based on the fundamentals we have.

In your posts, I believe you're failing to do that. You're failing to move on past what the game can't be and comparing it to other games that do not have single player online, friends only and mulitplayer modes. Unfortunately that's not helpful, it's not actionable, it's not something that is going to produce a better game for YOU.

You really need to take what they have and move on from that point. This game has limitations that you may not like, that may not be ideal, but the expectation that they will create Pillars of Eternity out of their existing infrastructure is not going to create the best game possible - it's going to create long years of frustration, disappointment, and wasteful time for both you and the development team.

There are so many things I would change about this game if I won the lottery and it were up to me. But because that is a dead end, I'm focused on making the parts of the game I don't like better, and the parts of the game I do like expanded. I don't spend time litigating the past or the areas of the game that I can't influence because we've moved on to a new stage of development. Does that make sense?

 

@Baron Drocis Fondorlatos; Brother this makes sense to me and probably does to many others. I am not the most semantically endowed here but you could probably start a new thread directed at Chris and encouraging all that wish to be involved to include their top three desires for inclusion into his Two Year plan. I am sure you can spearhead this with a lot better wording and will receive more replies than if I did it. Let me know what you think and lest be part of the solution. R/Boris/El Pirata

 

I actually think they are lagging behind... with possibly more to come, but it's how long that wait is that seems the sticking point, "if there are yet to come changes waiting to be changed for the offline SOTA" That's allot of "what if" but I think we still have yet to see what's going to come of offline content.. It's the second fiddle it seems.

I do hope you always keep the vigil for the offline needed content @Lord_Darkmoon

@Baron Drocis Fondorlatos , I think you are justified and I agree in most of what you have stated

As for my views, it seems that the terminology of the word "Launch" has sent a wave of questions attempting to catch the bus, "which already has their concerns with them on that bus". But it's not exactly a bus that's somehow leaving It's very unlikely that our current forums and it's members will ever somehow vanish and thus vanish those concerns, "which it's not".
It's a launch into the future which our concerns shall all follow along with !'

~Time Lord~

 

You're blaming the guy that orders a hamburger for not constructively complaining when handed a taco. The immediate rebuke when any feedback on the single player experience has been voiced has always been "don't worry about it, the single player experience is going to get a serious looking to in release (current release + 3)".

 

Just because you put shredded cheese on a hamburger that doesn't make it a taco.

No one in the Kickstarter ever said that Lord Darkmoon would love the single player offline game. That wasn't one of the features of the game.

 

Of course it does make sense.
For me the whole development process from the very beginning was a "failure". They failed to deliver an accurate description of the game but instead told many things that could be misinterpreted easily and some things that were obvioulsy worded the wrong way.
Then the game developed without informing the community and backers of fundamental changes (remember the first overland map?). Sure a game can change but wouldn't it be better to inform the community before confronting them with the changes? This almost always leads to a conflict.
Then at least I got the impression that the devs simply don't understand why some people are upset. I read that Chris thinks that some of us want a single-player game only, which is completely wrong. We want to have a single-player game, too, if SotA is described as a MMORPG with a single-player game. I never said remove the multiplayer. I thought the idea of having a "basically single-player game" in which I can invinte friends for coop fun or enter some social hubs to meet strangers etc. would be great.

I remember when the game was rather early in development and I (and some others) pointed out what we don't like that some features were missing to create a good single-player experience, too. Back then we were told to wait and be patient until the devs implement those things. Now, shortly before release, after we waited, we are now told that we have to accept that it didn't happen and concentrate on what is there. Somehow I feel punked by this, I hope you can understand my feelings...

 

A game that plans to be under constant development will always be like a taco which transforms into always a better hamburger the longer it's looked at.
Constant Development is like that.

What we see is "the base of where all things will be built on ... or that's my understanding of what's "released" ~TL~

 

Punked very nice, it is actually lying, there are a few items that are blatant lies / misdirection / deception that where used.

 

I understand what you're saying, but I don't understand your feelings.

The overland map example you mentioned is a good one. It's a great example of the developers trying to figure out a way to save time and money and provide essentially the same functionality. I had no problem with the change. Was the first overland map inferior to what we have now? Yes, I would say that it is, both visually and functionally. But that cost us months of time and money. Both because we had to scrap the first map and because it simply took more of both to complete the new map.

Yes, it's a fact that the original demo showed a three dimensional map that looks similar (though NOT EXACT) to what we have now. I would argue what we have now is far superior to what was shown in the demo (despite the fact that there's no Dragon "yet" that flies overhead).

But what this shows is that there is a complete failure for some people to understand the difference between a demo and a pitch, and multiple years of development that may or may not result in the exact thing that was talked about years and years ago. The most unfortunate aspect of this for me is that instead of putting all of our energy into making the best game POSSIBLE, some of us are more concerned with digging our heels into the ground and yelling about obscure changes as if it were all a lie to begin with.

 

The game is supposed to require a suspension of disbelief, not the development process. If singleplayer mattered to the devs, it be done by now, making a decent single player game is far easier than an MMO, see Kingdom of Amalur.
It isn't hard to see why, single player can't sell $1000 pixels, dev resources follow the business plan. Personally, I'd rather have seen them sell a million copies for $40, but I can't stop them if their goal is to sell 1000 copies for $100k