Open interview about SotA

No I expected the KS to be the main point of funding. I was not aware the KS was only made to fund a cash shop, and then that cash shop to fund the game and keep the lights on. I expected very minimal cash shop items. I expected the beginning newsletters to be more about development of the game, and not full of new cash shop items and what the community is doing in game. That's great. But what is Portalarium doing to the game? I expected Portalarium to be up front and honest, not hidden, that the cash shop would be funding the game more so than the KS goal. Yes they have said and hinted at microtransactions. But they didn't say during the KS how pervasive it would be.

But hey, at least Portalarium prevented me from backing Star Citizen. At least I could see that going the wrong way.

All depends on how you want to call it. Someone flips a house, they have to buy it first. To me flipping something is to get something to sell it. Doesn't matter if you get it for free or pay for it.

Threats given such as "Cash shop optional, but if you don't spend we can't make the game." Optional, huh?

 

Thanks for making me laugh hahah that also makes my day...

They probably bought those features for 10$ on the unity story and modified the animations... thats not real feature creep...

The real feature creep is very recent (and I enjoy it very much personally) and looks like it will expo curve on us

So sure some people's stark appearances are indeed justified, people should accept not to derail this thread because it will allow other questions that are part of the OP to be again pushed under the rug.

Some questions have been answered, others still loom...

 

Well to me feature creep is anything that wasn't meant to be in the game. We'll agree to disagree on that point. Glad you enjoyed it.

 

Be honest if you want others to be, you have learned more than your money's worth on this adventure.

 

Threats...seriously? Wow, I want you shopping in my store.

 

Correction, I enjoy it, present and will enjoy it.

Because I'm not an investor, I didn't have any goals in coming here, no agenda.

It's normal that some people might feel on edge.

Features that need updating and expanding and might conflict... the reason we use the expression is because its kind of excessive

the reason it is discussed is that the project can run out of funds and close, the feature creep can implode on itself and then... devs have to beg for a little more, then scale down their bandwidth and server usage, somehow.

It's a complex issue, and I've clearly challenged @Mykll on his actual purpose in rehashing those ideologies.

Usually thats when people start to ignore me and those who have eyes to read, read.

 

Nothing was hidden. I posted a link where they talking about it DURING THE KS. We've know they where there. Since you knew (or should have known) they where going to have microtransactions, why didn't you ASK about the extent of them? They weren't dishonest about them. They didn't hide them. They flat out said it would be in during the KS. You didn't bother to look at what they where saying, and that's on you.

You can call it whatever you like, but that's not what the term means and everyone knows it. You're just embarrassing yourself misusing it.

[Citation Needed] I'm sure you can link me to where Portalarium staff actually said this...

 

They didn't... but mentioned the server costs and the fact we need to keep participating or stop asking for more features (and that seemed to include the single player story Ultima 6-7 style in its full promised manifestation)... CONJECTURE

That is where he is coming from... and many people like him, they don't like the MMO style as it shapes up then they try to fold back on the single player only to find it neglected.

It's the same story all the time, everywhere, you both have an attitude right now...

 

I would comment but I have had 2 posts "deleted" and I have no idea what context or what was said. So for my posterity I guess I will just say: "mmmmghhghghghghhfhasdfasfhagagf ".

 

A real simple example is portalarium officially and clearly stating :

"Ok guys, bag mode is gone."

Which they actually did.

"Ok guys, single player story ultima style is gone, for now we have sota style single player story but don't lose hope ! As soon as we finish the feature creep that MMO fans paid for, we'll have the props and structure to make a great ultima style story like we promised"

You see the difference ? I'm sure everyone agrees... thats whats missing, a bit of nerd seeing eye to eye.

Your posts are forever engraved in ma brainz, lord Domdred

 

We will just have to disagree. I'll stop responding because Berek will just come in and lock the thread for going in circles. We both made our points and getting nowhere.

Yeah ok.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flipping

http://crappy-games.wikia.com/wiki/Asset_Flipping

Nowhere does he specify free or paid asset, only other people's work.

Yep. Sounds like one to me. "Unless you keep buying stuff from the OPTIONAL cash shop, the game that you already funded, can't be made."

http://steamcommunity.com/app/326160/discussions/0/1480982338958845064/#c1480982338962229636

 

You shouldn't have ignored me, now face the super shaman style truth of destiny fully charged !!!

*fizzle*

Awh...

Dude... do you realize that having this game "finished" means 5 episodes and the definition of finished for portalarium might set the bar a little higher than you did ?

This game is funded and the server will run until episode 5 I'm certain of that. They are speaking of their vision here, not saying that they have to stop at episode 3 according to recent statistics and feature creep

I do admit the message is worded strangely, and I would edit it if I was portalarium... but you could have told them that in PM I guess... lol

If you do not buy, everything will die, says the oracle

*rofls down the hill*

 

Just to get back on topic a little, if we don't want to be seen as trolls or trolling then we have to be careful not to give the impression that we are baiting people of opposing opinions into lengthy "back and forth" exchanges or petty semantics arguments for our own satisfaction. As a community we have other people to consider and we don't want to drown out their voices with these types of exchanges, so we must uphold a certain level of etiquette.

It makes the task more difficult for moderators when we can't simply allow someone to post an opinion without cherrypicking the points they have made. Doing so too often will ultimately lead even mods, who are only human, to wonder if we are actually just trolling.

It can be argued that this section is for general discussion, but we have to draw the line somewhere. The best thing to do when you see an opinion that you disagree with, and can't just allow it to go unchallenged because you are passionate about the subject, is sum up your thoughts in a singular reply to that person and don't offer further replies in the thread, but opt to take it to a private message to continue the argument if need be.

I know we can't all be as well spoken and articulate as Lord British, but his response to the OP is the perfect example of good posting etiquette. He took the time to summarize his response so as to not burden to the community with back and forth exchanges. The OP may or may not have been fully satisfied with the response, but was sure to thank him and did not cherrypick individual points. Another great example of the type of behavior that is ultimately beneficial to the community, but especially the critics of the game in this community, who have a reputation for not adhering to the aforementioned standards of good posting etiquette and therefore clashing with moderators.

 

Many games that are funded on KS can be made without dipping into an optional cash shop. If not, why call it Kickstarter?

I've funded SotA, Ashes of Creation, Grim Dawn, Battletech and many board games, but it seems like only SotA needed additional funding even after such a great boost to their start by being in KS top 3 funded MMOs of all time. This part I can't fathom really.

Players can argue it's the devs mishandling of funds, or basic shortsightedness, or just their ineptness at realising the true scale of the project, but we won't know for sure.

So for now, let's stick to what we can see, which is R51 and the current state of the game. I will chime in more here and on stream when I start playing r51 this month.

I prefer to understand the situation myself and know the truth, at least from my point.

With launch, as I mentioned from last year when I took my break, we'll get ever closer to clearly understanding why SotA is the way it is with maybe 150 active players currently when it's the spiritual success to UO and the player base should be 50-100 times more than that.

 

All nice and dandy Jamma, but its a forum, not a crow you send once every 3 months... some of us don't speak english very well and need to ask questions, sometimes they don't interpret phrases correctly and even concepts if they require specialized knowledge.

So it will always be a lil chaotic... you cannot as you say realistically expect people to follow these guidelines.

Often at the end of back and forth, people realize they have been saying the same thing all along and everyone is happy, if you block the discussion in the middle it might never reach that maturity and you risk side shoots of this discussion elsewhere in unrelated threads causing even more mayhem.

It really could be a thread on its own since ethics seem to interest you... the topic here is inviting devs to answer questions of the OP. To be inviting, we have to all have the same definitions, and sit and listen, then discuss if we need to change our definitions, then ask questions again with a new perspective.

Cool story of forums, bro. The very reason we handle this definition shaping in public and not in IMs is that anyone, even the unknown member with 0 posts can come in and tell me I'm wrong, or that we're both wrong. It's the very reason you suppose we should be more succinct

 

I will just leave that here:

kick-start verb [ T ] (HELP)
to make something start to happen

 

He does specify "There’s no artistic or mechanical consistency to the game because it’s a hodgepodge of character models, environments, and systems taken from other peoples’ work, a bunch of templates that real developers are supposed to build off of, rather than sell on to the customer." That's not the situation here. The assets are modified to fit the existing world, they are combined with original assets, to form an original (if lacking) story.

Before you quote Jim (Thank God For Him), you might want to familiarize yourself with him a little. Here's another quote from Jim:

"Quick recap for those just joining the class, an asset flip is a game consisting entirely or almost entirely of pre-made assets that the quote-unquote "developer" didn't make or didn't even bother editing. Character models, environment objects, UIs, hubs, maps, everything can be purchased pre-developed via engine stores for Unity Game Guru, Unreal, etc. The idea is that these assets form an easy foundation upon which a developer can craft their own original ideas. An asset flipper is less of a developer and more of a kid with Lego and zero imagination. They dump pre-bought characters into pre-bought maps with pre-bought overlays, giving no thought to artistry, level design or coherence of any kind. That is an asset flip."

--Jim Sterling ()

That is also NOT what you have here. You can say you don't like the game's style; the steam-punk astetic may not be your thing. That's fair, but even if you don't like it, saying they've used almost nothing but pre-bought assets, maps, and menus without any concern for coherence or level design... that's objectively false.

That's not what it says at all. It says "If we don't do that, then the game will never be finished. No one is forced to buy those items, so it is entirely up to you." If YOU don't buy the items it doesn't spell the end; someone else will. That's about the weakest thing I've seen called a threat in a long time.

 

Most people do though. It's only a small amount of people who would benefit from my suggested etiquette guidelines being added into the official community guidelines, which would save mods some trouble given that they seem to enforce them as official guidelines already.

Of course, I'm only speaking based on a general observation that adhering to a certain forum etiquette would prevent people from being seen as trolls, which seems to lead to them sometimes being moderated (and/or heated arguments with other community members.) Remember that if managing this community had been my job, I would have never blocked such conversations from completing. I have always advocated for another section to move such threads to so that they could be completed, rather than locking them.

However, I wouldn't rule out that certain arguments might never end, even if they were allowed to continue. That's why I also would have designed this alternate section to only allow a small number of new postings per day, to encourage passionate posters to agree to disagree sooner rather than later if that is the case. Think of it as a gentle nudge in the right direction, as opposed to a hardline approach that often leads to rebellion.

I hope this helps you better understand my point of view on the subject.

 

Even dolts would understand that there is a difference between saying the game is an asset flip, to saying the devs flip assets. I don't believe myself or anyone else really thinks this game is an asset flip game, but that the devs do flip assets. If you don't like such markety terms like flipping assets you can say resell assets if you want.

 

I'm not sure if the OP received what they need from us here, but they are free to contact us at any time. Since the thread has so many topics and it's not really cover many of them anymore between you guys, I'm going to close it.

Let's keep the Postmortem day free of drama please, thanks .