Support NeoGAF

[Deadbeat]

This is great!
And yeah, Games should be released when they're ready, because once it gets bad Press, People will stop buying it.

DayZ proves otherwise. As long as your fanbase is rabid enough, they will keep the gravy train rolling.

 

[Unbound By Death]

You are welcome

Too good.

 

[Azih]

While the game is really buggy and you really have to have as many saves as possible to avoid bugs they are releasing large patches for it very regularly. It's playable enough to get through the game.

 

[JMTHEFOX]

You are welcome

Holy shit, I'm dying...

 

[bj00rn_]

ffs..

EA = EA
Early Access = Early Access

Ok, so you're a lazy fuck who invents crappy abbreviations just to save you from using a millionth of a calorie.. Well, fuck you, write the whole fucking word already.

Spoiler

Disclaimer: I'm not really angry Happy holidays everyone!

 

[Skyzard]

^ I didn't even realize.


This happens with basically everything now that if it's not fairly complete by early access stage I don't buy it unless I NEED it (Assetto Corsa).

Early Access version number 0.2 ------jumps to-------> 1.0 release with no little to no additions. Even fucking Star Citizen's first module is 1.0 now. lmao. New additions? Added more ship parts to the REAL WORLD store. Added a rear view camera.
It doesn't mean anything, except to expect less.

The low version number makes you think a lot more updates and improvements are coming. Nope. No.

It's all bullshit these days, good luck finding a nice polished and finished product that doesn't feel like it's missing 2/3 of the game without paying 2-3x the cost over a period of months to a year.

 

[epmode]

This happens with basically everything now that if it's not fairly complete by early access stage I don't buy it unless I NEED it (Assetto Corsa).

Early Access version number 0.2 ------jumps to-------> 1.0 release with no little to no additions. Even fucking Star Citizen is 1.0 now. lmao. New additions? Added more ships and parts to the REAL WORLD store. Added a rear view camera.



The low version number makes you think a lot more updates and improvements are coming. Nope. Nope. Nope.

Star Citizen is not at version 1.0. Obviously. It's missing practically everything that will be in the final game. Arena Commander (the dogfighting module) is at 1.0 and and CIG has been very transparent about what the different version numbers will bring.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13909-Arena-Commander-Launched

AC 1.0 indicates that everything promised at the unveiling of the dogfighting module is now in the public release. Arena Commander 2.0 will bring multicrew ships as well as larger maps to accommodate bigger fights (this is actually a big deal for the engine).

Other components (FPS mode, planetside, single-player campaign, persistent universe) will be rolled out over time. The full multiplayer universe won't be ready until 2016 at the earliest. Again, CIG has been very open with their estimates and the development plan. You can always see exactly what each studio is working on in their monthly studio report.

Anyway, version numbers aren't a science. Every company handles them differently and it's common to see large jumps in version numbers as a product enters different stages. I've personally been seeing this since the 90s.

A good rule of thumb is not to pay so much attention to the precise number since it often doesn't have meaning besides <1.0 or >= 1.0.

 

[MDSLKTR]

This will get more pages than the ot eh

 

[Uthred]

The image says it all.

It says a variety of things, firstly its reprehensible when a developer tries to stifle negative opinions of their game, secondly, if he hasnt played the game in over two weeks from the date it was posted then he may not have actually played the release version, which would make his review less useful. But still no reason to stifle it.

So how bad is it? I knew it was buggy on release because, well, indie wrpg, but I didn't know it was anything catastrophic.

Put about 20 hours in post release, ran into one bug that was caused by a patch and rectified within a few hours by hotfix. Its janky, but not particularly buggy

They release broken games (so they can be put on the steam holiday sale daily deals) - this censorship is just icing on the cake.

It's essentially a word used to describe developers doing something stupid.

But Dead State isnt broken, certainly not in any meaningful way, though this is indeed a stupid thing to do

 

[Skyzard]

Star Citizen is not at version 1.0. Obviously, considering that it's missing practically everything that will be in the final game. ARENA COMMANDER is at 1.0. And CIG has been very transparent about what the different version numbers will bring.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/13909-Arena-Commander-Launched

1.0 indicates that everything promised at the unveiling of the dogfighting module is now in the public release. Arena Commander 2.0 will bring the multicrew ships as well as larger maps to accommodate bigger fights (this is actually a big deal for the engine).

Other components will be rolled out over time. The full multiplayer universe won't be ready until 2016 at the earliest. Again, CIG has been very open with their estimates and the development plan. You can always see exactly what each studio is working on in their monthly studio report.

2 "maps" and a handful of unbalanced ships is everything they promised since the beginning for it?

Damn.

I know it's just the ac module (edited a bit late, my bad), but that's basically all we have to go on. Although I do (really) appreciate space racing.

While it's now at version 1.0, this isn't the final version - nor is it the 'proper' one - of Arena Commander, as Roberts stated in the post:
"I would like to stress that today&#8217;s release of Arena Commander 1.0 is a beginning, not an ending," he said, "This milestone does not denote the completion of Arena Commander, it kicks off an even more significant phase of its development.

 

[jay]

I guess someone should edit the Wikipedia page on Censorship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship.

I'm glad you already covered this. I was confused by the reference to the bill of rights.

I heard a rumor that things have happened both before and outside of America.

 

[Aselith]

Dead State runs like shit on my very capable system and it's ugly. I regret backing it.

 

[epmode]

This will get more pages than the ot eh

Naturally. It's a PC exclusive game after all.

2 "maps" and a handful of unbalanced ships is everything they promised since the beginning for it?

Arena Commander is the skeleton that the rest of the game will be built on. CIG laid out their version number plans the day it was unveiled and they haven't deviated from that. And no, 1.0 doesn't mean that it's finished.

Regarding the maps complaint, there's not much of a point in building more maps until CIG updates the engine to support double-precision floating point numbers for player position.

 

[SpongeBob NoPants]

As of that screen shot (where it's clearly marked as flagged) that singular review posted like two days ago had 2x the votes of any other review posted since the game was released, and the review swing is nowhere near as wildly negative as to think something like that would indicate suddenly 600 people coming out of nowhere and upvoting it to the top so quickly, and considering you don't need to own a game to upvote a review but simply have a free steam account that takes 5 mins to make...I don't know about you, but I might consider that a little fishy too. Then you add in the fact that the review was posted after said dude was apparently banned on the forums for posting stupid shit that would get banned here like personally insulting the devs and such, it makes the entire thing seem pretty suspect.

Maybe, but maybe not.

I'd never heard of the game until it hit the sales front page the other day, so I clicked on the link to find out a little about it. I noticed that almost a quarter of people who had left feedback weren't impressed, so I scrolled down to see why - after all, I might still buy the thing if the reasons why some people don't like it aren't as important to me.

I read this guy's comment and agreed with the sentiment that the developer's shouldn't suddenly declare an unfinished game as being ready for release simply to be able to cash in on the sales. I don't know whether what he says is true or not, but it did give me reason to check out the update history, where I saw that there has been a lot of post release patching, with more scheduled to come. So, I might check out the game again at some point in the future but, for now, I've saved my money for something else and, because I'd found it useful, I gave the comment a thumbs up before moving on.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people had followed a similar process and, in effect, the devs may have shot themselves in the foot with their (understandable) eagerness to get on Steam's front page.

 

[Skyzard]

Naturally. It's a PC exclusive game after all.



Arena Commander is the skeleton that the rest of the game will be built on. CIG laid out their version number plans the day it was unveiled and they haven't deviated from that. And no, 1.0 doesn't mean that it's finished.

Regarding the maps complaint, there's not much of a point in building more maps until CIG updates the engine to support double-precision floating point numbers for player position.

Totally forgot about double precision.

One small building section already lags things to shit on my 780ti (the lap checkpoints) and the combat maps are mostly super empty with a backdrop. I know it's space, but I was hoping for a death star sort of battle and atm I know it wouldn't run at more than 15fps.

Not looking forward to that double precision upgrade. The game seems like it's 2 console generations too early.


The game promise is incredible and surreal... and I can't see them getting there anytime soon (like a decade) with how they've been progressing with updates and what they've accomplished. I hope and wish but there's a limit. "1.0" feels like a slap in the face.

 

[Puppet Shadow]

...

I read this guy's comment and agreed with the sentiment that the developer's shouldn't suddenly declare an unfinished game as being ready for release simply to be able to cash in on the sales. I don't know whether what he says is true or not, but it did give me reason to check out the update history, where I saw that there has been a lot of post release patching, with more scheduled to come. So, I might check out the game again at some point in the future but, for now, I've saved my money for something else and, because I'd found it useful, I gave the comment a thumbs up before moving on.

I did the same. It was on my wishlist and I was about to buy it, but I always scroll down first to check out the comments, and decided to wait on it for now.

That said, I've picked up a few early access games without regret. Prison Architect is one of my GOTY.

 

[Isurus]

am I the only one who thought EA = Electronic Arts at first?

Nope. I just spent the past few minutes scratching my head until I realized it meant Early Access.

 

[benicillin]

I've played a fair bit of Dead State since it was first available on early access and barring some of the bugs I've run into I've definitely enjoyed it. Don't necessarily agree with pulling down the review or anything, but I sympathize with the developers who have done a good job of fixing bugs post-release considering it's a very small developer. People sure enjoy their outrage, though.

 

[epmode]

The game promise is incredible and surreal... and I can't see them getting there anytime soon (like a decade) with how they've been progressing with updates. I hope and wish but there's a limit. "1.0" feels like a slap in the face.

I honestly think you're expecting too much from pre-alpha software. Star Citizen as a finished product is literally years away.

Right now, it's just an interesting look at megabudget development. It's very rare for those games to provide such early access to playable code.

 

[AndyMoogle]

The game really isn't that glitchy. It's not like Baldur's Gate, Fallout and other big cRPG titles didn't have big glitches back in the day. These are complex games with plenty of things that can go wrong. When you consider the really low budget for this game you'll end up with a product that isn't going to be anywhere near perfection. I'm just happy that we've gotten the game, finally. It's perfectly playable right now too.

 

[Amir0x]

Since when does Ubi flag reviews?

You're right!

They just try to buy silence and fuck with consumers ability to get a fair day 1 analysis of a product release.

Not -strictly- censorship, but hey! Who's really keeping track anyway?

 

[NervousXtian]

You know, it is what is with the release.. but what sucks is this review wasn't even a review of the game. It was a rant, a poor rant at that.

So what does a dev do when the pitchforks come out... have a forum full of shitposts?

I've heard the games no where near as buggy as some of the detractors are leading people on to think.

 

[cheststrongwell]

Dudes need to stop buying games second one. I hardly buy anything without reading opinions on gaf and other forums. It doesn't take long to get a good view of the state of games I want.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

Official Response About Review "Controversy"

For everyone that has either been a long-term part of the DB community or has jumped on to comment about something without hearing our side, here are the facts.

The review poster was originally addressed on the forums, and after the thread began to get off-topic, it was closed down by a developer.

A second topic, which restated the exact same comments as the previous thread, was started by the same poster, after which it began to also go off-topic and became abusive. That thread was closed by a moderator, and after abusive comments towards both the devs and mods (including demanding a personal, public apology), a mod banned the original poster. The original poster still posts with an alt, who has not been banned.

A third topic has been opened stating the exact same things as the first two threads. It has not been closed.

The poster, after being banned for abusive comments, posted a long review that focused less on the game, and more on DoubleBear as a company. The review contains only one line about the actual game, and instead focuses on the bugs in the game, and reiterates the demand for a personal apology - it does not mention that DoubleBear has released four patches within two weeks addressing many of the major issues. The original poster never stated what their issues were, and has ignored attempts from the dev team to work to get them solved.

We have since learned (this morning) that the review was flagged by someone on the dev team, based on Steam guidelines regarding off-topic reviews - their actions are currently under internal review. We apologize for any confusion or misinformation relating to this, and have been piecing this together (a tough thing to do over the holidays - we're not exactly "in the office")

As you can see, the review is no longer flagged. Additionally, you will notice there are plenty of negative reviews that are not flagged. We do not possess the ability to delete reviews, and we left all of the reviews, positive or negative, up.

A post went up on Reddit yesterday, which a developer responded to personally, and the dev response was apparently deleted. We will do our best to clear up any misunderstandings relating to the incident.

I know it's easy to see something on Reddit or on forums and instantly take the side of the consumer, but this is the impact of someone who is trying to crowdsource their frustration by painting us as some kind of curmudgeons against free speech. This is one person's word against ours. We have a history of not only interacting with our forums, documenting our every move on Kickstarter, being frank on our forums, and working with the community to fix bugs and address issues with the game. We welcome all feedback, be it positive or negative, and would never try to shut down any criticism.

We're sorry if this event has shaken your faith in DoubleBear, and we urge you to look at our Kickstarter history, our forums, and our interactions with people here in the Steam community to find our standard of politeness and eagerness to solve issues. We stand by our game, our devs, and our mods, and we stand with those who have been kind enough to take a chance on buying our game and supporting us. We will always do our best to support you, and pay back that faith in kind. Thank you, and Happy Holidays.

 

[ArjanN]

You know, it is what is with the release.. but what sucks is this review wasn't even a review of the game. It was a rant, a poor rant at that.

So what does a dev do when the pitchforks come out... have a forum full of shitposts?

I've heard the games no where near as buggy as some of the detractors are leading people on to think.

Pretty much. From what I've tried of it, the game seems promising, but still kinda rough around the edges, but that was what I was expecting anyway.

Either way that's a terrible "review".

 

[Cipherr]

1) "So I started supporting only EA and Kickstarter games."

Ok, well that's dumb. There is absolute NO reason that you should expect these games to be more polished/less buggy than games from proven developers/publishers. If anything, these games are probably a far higher risk to be in that sort of state. Some games don't ever get finished at all. The 'funding' from backers is sometimes too small, or the team is woefully underprepared and/or overambitious and it hurts development greatly.

So while I know its annoying to have buggy or incomplete games, this was not the way to go to solve that and I feel that this is a case where the average gamer's lack of comprehension about how development works has definitely created a bit of a mess with these backer projects.

2) "more than I could afford sometimes."

So this just shows how much he doubled down on his ignorance. That's a stupid thing to do from a financial perspective in the first place, but the absolute faith he must have placed on these projects just because they are being funded(partially or wholly) by people is astoundingly naïve.

3) "We the gamers are there publisher"

No, you are not. This brings me back to the Kickstarter debates about what being a 'backer' implies in terms of your personal input. This is a bit different, but for the same reasoning, you are not a publisher, nor do you have any rights over the concerned product, unless it is explicitly said that you do.

All in all, it really needs to be reinforced that Early Access and Kickstarter projects are *risks*. There is no guarantee for a complete, 100% polished experience at the end. Know that going in. Put your money in because you want to back a project or because you would like to get in on the ground floor of a game's development.

All of this here.

 

[Valnen]

You are welcome

Something tells me this will get a lot of use over the next couple years. Could do without the 9gag watermark though.

 

[JumpJeff84]

Dead State runs like shit on my very capable system and it's ugly. I regret backing it.

My computer needs an upgrade and I was afraid this game would run like shit, which is why I haven't bought it. It looked interesting, but I heard it ran poorly on even up to date machines.

 

[draetenth]

That "review" was terrible and should have been flagged simply because it wasn't even about the damn game. It was just a rant about Kickstarter and Early Access games not meeting his expectations.

I don't care if you like or dislike a game. I don't care if you like or dislike Kickstarter or Early Access. When I read a review, I want to know: how does it run, how is the content, how is the length, what is the difficulty like and is the developer supportive of the title? Most reviews (positive and negative) generally don't do this, but a simple "I liked or disliked this game" without even giving a reason why is still better than some off topic drivel like that review. At least they are on topic if barely...

That's just me though...

I haven't really had time to play the game (and I don't intend to anytime soon), but I just loaded it up quickly to see how it looks. From just playing the tutorial with a GTX 760, 1920 x 1080, Fullscreen, SSAO on, HDR on and everything set to high quality (texture, mesh, lightning, shader): everything seems to run smoothly. I don't even think it looks that bad (just my opinion though...). Again, that is just the tutorial so there isn't that much on the screen (except lots of fire), but I didn't notice any issues... Maybe people are right and it does get worse later on...

 

[Aselith]

My computer needs an upgrade and I was afraid this game would run like shit, which is why I haven't bought it. It looked interesting, but I heard it ran poorly on even up to date machines.

Yeah, I have a 760 with 8gigs of RAM and a 3.2 Quadcore and it runs most poorly.

 

[Vlodril]

i have a good enough pc but nothing great (660ti) and it runs fine. nvidia btw if it matters.

 

[Corpekata]

I'm keen to believe the upvote shenanigans. That review has more upvotes than reviews on a lot of mega popular AAA games do. And in 4 days it seems.

And demanding a public apology, yeah, this guy seems kinda like a bit of a weirdo.

Game is not without issues but certainly not "We were betrayed!" sort of histrionics.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

Game is not without issues but certainly not "We were betrayed!" sort of histrionics.

Well said, Corpekata.

 

[Uthred]

i have a good enough pc but nothing great (660ti) and it runs fine. nvidia btw if it matters.

Same, here, zero performance issues over about twenty hours of play. I mean the game is rough around the edges, but no slowdown, or FPS drops or anything like that, nvidia as well.