resurect starbase

Status
Not open for further replies.

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
369
#61
Calling an Early Access Open Alpha game in it's early stages of development a "dead game" shows a real lack of knowledge on how game development works. You can't even consider Starbase a game right now because of how early the development of features and mechanics are. So when you see a drop in player populations during these stages is extremely common. People will play until they explored all the current features then come back when they drop more features. This game is probably 15% of the way completed, it will be in Alpha as they continue to design the game for the next year and half before we actually see the Beta version. Alpha versions are games where the core mechanics and features are being designed, coded, and implemented into the game with possible change or removal features to get the core mechanics right. Beta is the stage right before release where there is no more new features being added but rather polished and minor bug fixes. We are not even close to Beta for a really long time.

You guys didn't buy the game Starbase, you prepaid for it with an option to test it out as it gets developed. That is the most simple way i can explain it. The fact is this, almost all EA games only have a few thousand players testing it at best, because those that want to play it but didn't buy into EA is because they want to play the full version not the development and testing part, so they rather wait. And as I read a lot of these posts I can see a good portion of you guys should of done the same and just waited for the full version. The way a lot of you talk negatively about the game actually shows how little you know about game development, the stages they go through, the process of EA, and what it means when your playing a Alpha stage game versus a fully released 1.0.

Just like a lot of players, i too am not playing very much right now, im waiting on the moon release. I may get my fill of all the current content and then quit playing until new content is released, unless this content smoothly transitions to the next, but because were in Alpha, we have no idea. My advice is, either wait for the next 2 years until the full version comes out, OR accept the fact you prepaid for a game that has a long time to go before it can be considered a real game, but you at least get the ability to ride along as it is being created.
 

shado20

Veteran endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
199
#62
all that this game needs to get off the ground even in this stage of things is a working player built station. as soon as player/tribe/faction/company built station can be built, and lived in, build ships at, store ships, basically live 100% out of not needing origin stations for anything. this is the single thing holding back players from playing, building empires and such. all the other fluf is just extra. the stations is the foundation of this games ability to nation build. we looked like we where close to having this back in CA, but at release stations changed 100%.
now station dont make sense, the station core is a minecraft block that holds all the power to create a shield/safezone,
station core should be a lot more to it, ship building is grate, then they got lazy with stations.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2021
Messages
2
#63
Yeah, I still read the forums :D

The doomsayer pattern seems to be that they want some immediate, cheap remedy which would maybe add a week more of playing for them, usually by burning a lot of remaining people with it, and then the game would be finally killed off for good. And if I dare to comment that no, we are doing it the proper way it attracts even more of those who have already given up to attack me and the players who dare to agree with the proper fixes.

Now I must kindly ask the doomsayers: please, stay civil or live up to your promises.
Well let me make a post then. Cause i do like this game, i'm still very interested, but it's quickly dying (which is also why i haven't posted so far). I haven't fired it up in months and i honestly don't feel a need to after just looking through the steam reviews, discussions, and these forums for a good hour or two to check on progress.

I've also played MMO's for decades (first one was Redmoon Online released in 1998) and beta tested them too (city of heroes/champions online closed beta, End of Nations closed alpha) so i'm not new to this.. game.

First off, player count. You're running an "MMO" with a bottom player count of <200 between 8-9 in the morning my time (seems your remaining player base is mostly EU with peaks around 22:00 Dutch time). This is a MAJOR problem.

You can quote early access to me, and i'll tell you: You are still asking €32,99 of me for that! This isn't a FREE alpha! Well, i bought it, but from the perspective of new players. Since your business model doesn't include a subscription, you live and die by new sales - and nobody's going to buy a MMO with 200-400 players, not even a fully built game. Feel free to argue with me on this, i've also written a few books on money and value. What's your burnrate/income and how long do you expect to maintain that, hmmm? Got any outside investors willing to invest with these kind of numbers? I wouldn't. It's not just the doomsayers that have to put up or shut up yknow. If money's no problem, then why release it in this state? Do you care about your customers, or just making a game?

Explain to me how your game is worth literally twice of Dyson Sphere Program, a Factorio like game where you build your own massive dyson sphere. Also EA, runs stable as a rock and VERY optimized, all about building massive things taking hours and hours. Because your game is an MMO? Not with ~375 players it's not. And "soon" doesn't entice impulse buyers.

Secondly, you say you're doing this "the proper way", but this couldn't be further from the truth. Let me show you one very simple EASY fix to bring back a few players, that REDUCES your burn rate, changes NOTHING about the game's roadmap progress, and is so obvious that you're gonna smack yourself in the face for not considering it before.

Why does this game have a PTU? Because "you're an MMO and you need to have a public test server"?

Patched more often? I checked the PTU forums and the EA announcements - they're dated approximately equally far apart. PTU updates don't come that much more often. Early access already comes with an implied more-frequent update schedule.

More unstable? The early access argument cuts both ways! You're asking €32,99 for this buggy piece of shit that's still eating ships after months and you have a server that's even MORE buggy?! lord help us! That's not a good look yknow.

Now, i'm being facetious just to prove a point. Most reviews i read are basically "Where's the content", "this game is buggy", "It's EA it's supposed to be buggy", "There's nothing to do but grind". Yet - on the PTU, you're holding events!!!

EVENTS! WHY FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ARE YOU NOT HOLDING EVENTS IN THE MAIN GAME THAT'S BORING AS HELL?!?!?!?!

WHICH IS ALSO IN EARLY ACCESS! YOU WANT ME TO BETA TEST EARLY EARLY ACCESS?!

Again, trying to prove a point. You can either tell me to expect bugs and implement stuff into the main game, or sell me a stable main game with some actual content and have a buggy test server for feedback. Having two buggy servers for feedback doesn't make sense! especially not when you're so swamped with bug reports you can't do both at the same time anyway. And no need to say you can, i've already seen comments to the effect of "i sent them a mail but they stopped responding to me". You guys are obviously swamped.

Worried about resetting the main world/consequences of that? Uhm, i hate to tell you, but not planning a wipe when you've already launched this early into the game's history is insane. Your economy is completely broken. HOW are you going to make credits rare again and the ores more valuable WITHOUT forcibly draining people's liquidity, or hurting one group over another, without creating vested interests/godlike companies? (hint, you won't).

And i saw a message that asteroids were recently regenerated in the safe-zone, so you effectively already broke that promise. People starting now get more advantage than people starting a few weeks ago. That's hypocritical - but it was also necessary and the right thing to do. As is just deleting the main server and making the PTU the main server as long as you say the game's still in alpha. When you release the official Beta, you can think about splitting them again... but not during pre-alpha lol. And don't give me that "true early access" bullshit either i've got 761 games in my steam library, don't think you're the first to say that.

As long as there's no economy, doing a wipe matters very little - and your economy is already beyond broken (i've written books on economics). Your only concern in this type of game concerning wipes during Alpha are Blueprints and YOLOL code, which is where the hard work people want to actually save goes - and you can selectively not-wipe those. People can blueprint their favorite ship, import it into the full game when it's ready, and still get a massive head start even with farming the resources all over again, as new players have to still learn this highly complex game. If updates threaten to break blueprints, rename all existing ones (OUTDATED) and have players deal with the fixes.

Let me point out another simple thing: Capital ships and moon bases aren't gonna bring people back. Very simple reason:

That's end game content right?

Your early game is boring. Before i can even get to a capital ship (or the moon for that matter), i have to mine rocks, and that's it. There's no trading, no story, nothing. Learning to build ships takes tens of hours. It only makes sense if you join an already-rich company that just feeds you stuff to skip the early game. What if i wanna play with a couple of friends in a universe, rather then a xx player limited dedicated server? How long will it take us to get a Capital ship in labor hours?

And how many ships will i lose to the easy ship builder to get there? Last i read it's still buggy. You talk about doing it properly, but i read back through the game's testing history, and it seems the EZ ship builder was added last minute before release with very little testing.

To appeal to the casuals. Don't deny it, don't think you're the very first game i saw panic because they were too afraid their game was too complex, and redesign a bad feature last minute to "make it work", making it worse all along the way and dying as a direct result of it.

Feel free to explain this to me: How is the easy ship builder actually easier to use than the fully fledged one? I would highly suggest renaming the darn thing to the "quick ship builder", because that's exactly what it is: Quick and dirty way to modify a ship. Fly in, swap a part, fly out, no fuss with individual plates or beams or whatever.

How is actually using the easy ship builder, easier than actually using the full ship builder + pre-fab modules? I'm dead serious here, i've played factorio, satisfactory and dyson sphere program; all essentially the same game from a top down, 1st person and 3rd person perspective, and i gotta say - top down works so much easier for planning and logistics than first person does, even 3rd person does because the camera's further back and there's more overview. I get disoriented in Satisfactory all the time with belts going everywhere - and that's not unlike how cables/pipes work in starbase. I've played your game. The big one's better.

If you had put ALL THIS TIME you've put into the easy builder, into tutorials for the fully fledged one, your playercount would be much higher. Less frustration, more fun, and your goal is to have people either end up there anyway or not mess with ship building at all and just focus on repairs, because some people just won't be interested in that.

Launching a game that is this complex without any proper explanation ingame about its functioning parts is not doing it properly. And i'm being kind here, because in all honesty, it's just plain stupid and shows a complete lack of care towards your customers. The wiki is barebones compared to the questions the game raises as well as horribly out of date in sections (never did update that station builder tutorial link huh?), and relying on a wiki is basically Minecraft level, which was a student project. Hoping other people fill it in for you isn't gonna happen with 400+ people. I'd hope they're in now.

"Early access" doesn't count when you have a choice to implement all kinds of things, and you didn't choose to implement tutorials at launch. That was a stupid choice.

Focusing on capital ships and mining when everything leading up to that sucks and is a boring grind, is also a stupid choice. Then testing them away from the main server and public view - in a early-alpha state game - is even stupider. Not wanting to wipe and not implementing a proper economy is stupid too.

And that's another easy fix too! Disable the origin station AH, enable player-stations AH via UI only, make each AH separate from each other and tell players "Proper implemented player trading NPCs will be coming later, but for now, we're enabling location based auction houses to facilitate inter-station trade". Give half the transaction fee to the player (or company) owning the station so there's an inventive to draw a crowd (since a popular station lets you buy alot of ore instead of mining it, increasing power, company or no).

And you literally haven't got to do anything more then run a X amount of copies of the origin AH you already have! No interlinking required because you want them separate. That'll automatically create points of interest in the game as some stations will see more activity than others. Which gives people a reason to explore: To see other player stations and to see what their auction inventory is like. Some stations will sell for higher prices, introducing arbitrage - by which trade lives and breathes. You have NO arbitrage in your game right now!!!

Developing games is a simple question of effort/result, and the above would be the lowest possible effort with the highest rate of return, and expand things to do in the universe without taking away alot of development time from capital ships. So it should be prioritized!

If this was WoW, you're basically announcing test raids on Onyxia when half of Elwynn Forest is missing.

Currently you've got an MMO with only 1 point of interest: The origin trading station. Because there's no way to trade outside of origin! There's no way to ferry items back and forth either.

Speaking of which. You say you wanna do this properly. You've made a MMO in space, all about grinding ore and building stuff with it. Yet it is impossible to transport anything except ore across space. There is no inventory for items, station parts, modules, etc etc.

How stupid is that?! There's no sugar coating this one. YOU made an incredibly stupid decision to focus on the wrong things. You're making a space game with a HEAVY focus on trade without the ability to trade (right now). And to compensate, you're focusing all trade on a single station, while promoting player stations as something to strive for! You can save the PvP argument - wars run on finances. If you want me to build a capital ship, but you don't wanna give me creative mode, i'm going to need to fund it. Considering the name, i'm expecting expensive.

If there is ONE GODDAMN THING that should've been in on day 1, it SHOULD HAVE BEEN the ability to craft items in mid-flight and transport items between stations. You've got a game BASED around doing NOTHING for HOURS as you travel back and forth - AND you've got an ENTIRE PROGRESSION TREE BASED ON CRAFTING!!!!

God that's such a frustratingly stupid contradiction. You guys have just forgotten you're building a game, and you're trying to build a universe simulator. What's the logic for no UI based inventory based on crates like you have for ore, only then for items or station modules? Volume? Oh but suddenly i can carry one of these modules on my fucking back and wave it around like a god because it's a game and placing it shouldn't require a team of construction workers? C'mon now.

Adapt the ore crates to hold items, modules, ANYTHING player inventory can also hold. **** volume, go by weight only and call it "gameplay mechanics till we find a better solution". Treat all items like ore for the time being, and just have them stack up based on weight, and make the weight distribution model the same too.

I'll stop typing since i've been at this long enough and i've voiced enough of my frustrations with the game i suppose. The last thing i can stand is a snobby developer saying "they're doing it properly" with so many goddamn glaring stupid mistakes. How about an apology instead for false advertising? (Attachment plates, Fully fledged station builder, Origin station traders/shops, Stuff REMOVED from closed alpha before launch which was NOT communicated!!! I had to look for HOURS to find attachment plates were removed, but they were all over the wiki though! Again, poor maintenance, barebones wiki, feature creep, the list goes on.)

I would like to see the path forward of the game fixed, cause i did enjoy many tens of hours building ships (but not actually flying them i never got into YOLOL). I'd very much like to build ships and make this my MMO of choice. But as it is now, the game's turning into an echo chamber that'll just die when the funds run out. I've seen this before with End of Nations.

No need to take my word for it. I thought about typing economy suggestions in the suggestion section, until i saw the last post from there was more then a month old! Not even enthusiastic kids anymore suggesting completely unworkable ideas? That just tells me the number of people passionate about the game is very low. Veteran testers don't suggest changing mistakes because the mistakes are already too numerous to change and the backlog too large, while the hyperactive kids have moved on to something they can be passionate about. Just like i've alpha tested games before, i've hung around on those forums before.

And yes, i know about the discord - but that's not the public face of the game. The website and steam reviews are. On which it's showing you had 1 negative review on November 9th, no reviews on the 10th, and 1 negative review on the 11th. People are barely even bothering to leave reviews anymore. That's real bad for any EA game.

I wish you guys luck, i really do. But don't pretend you're even close to a sustainable path or doing things properly. This has been, without a doubt, the worst MMO launch that i've ever seen in 20 years of playing the darn things. And yes, like the late great Total Biscuit used to say: If you're charging money, you've launched.
 

Distuth

Active endo
Joined
Sep 8, 2021
Messages
27
#64
I gotta say, I admire the passion! But I think you went from complaints to personal attacks on the developer, to outright rambling about "easy fixes" all coated in a slimy layer of anger and professed 'wisdom'.

Ironically, despite your dismissal of enthusiastic kids suggesting completely unworkable ideas, this shares a lot with those posts.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
17
#65
Ressurect the game? Like... why? Imho I'd just kill the live server (or it's support) and progress with major features and important bugfixing on PTU during 2022. :D
All the time trying to make this build of Starbase into a playable game for regular players is just wasted, the game is gonna be so different with future major features that people will keep making posts like Desogames all the time, devs can spend hundreds of hours bugfixing and polishing this build with so called simple fixes, but it will be all broken and unbalanced again after a major update or two.

I know you are somehow disappointed with current state of Starbase, especially after EA on Steam, because games in EA are usually close to a finished game (the EA release is usually as a part of the beta test), but this is not the case, games are not ment to be played regularly during alpha phase so don't try that, test the sh*t out of it, take part in official events (they are important for developers) write constructive criticism and reports, play more if you enjoy it (if the part of the game works, such as ship designer), but that's about it, don't try to play something that is not meant to be played and don't whine about it, don't bother devs and other staff with stupid posts, reports and tickets if it's not new or truly game breaking.
 
Last edited:

shado20

Veteran endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
199
#66
the way this game was supposed to go was we create the world, they give us the tools to do so.
not asking for quick fixes, just asking for the start of the game!
but instead of working on the stat of the game, i see patch notes on END GAME content!
there is very little start to this game, thats why i have been arguing about working stations, at least by a minimum the game would start
 
Joined
Aug 6, 2021
Messages
19
#67
Desogames post is indeed very passionate. Allow me to stress that LauriFBs post, which seemingly triggered Desogames response, was unprofessional. A company official can not and should not openly belittle members of their playerbase and encourage them to leave. Absolute no-go.
"We're going to do it the proper way" - that statement rubbed me the wrong way. Hard. What is the proper way? The way the devs would like to handle things? In the long run anything will only be proper if the playerbase is happy with it. Being a dev alone will not make all your decisions proper. Sometimes you need dialoge and critical voices. And yes, players can sometimes voice worthwile things.

What I personally dislike the most by now is the lack of communication. We have the roadmap, and rare developer feedback. The information given is often quite vague - which is ok to some extend. I expect FB to experiment and fine-tune things on the way. They cannot give exact answers on every problem, because these answers often don't exist yet. But they CAN share their ideas with us.
FB has a "Alpha discussion" subforum, which was in use up until June, about a month before the open alpha was launched. I wished FB would still use that subforum, and more often so. Use it to present their ideas and ask for feedback like they did pre-launch. I wish we would be treated like testers and asked for our feedback. How much of the 'unwanted' criticism and how many of the rants would be respectful feedback in the according threads instead? Afterall we *payed for access* to their alpha and are by definition testers.

Ah well. Who am I talking to, anyways?
 

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
369
#68
but its not a game yet, its a project in development, your not playing the game your testing mechanics and features as they develop the core process of the game. this is open Alpha, not even Beta yet, this is the process of the game to test out what will work and what will not work.

This is the actual definition, "Alpha is a very early rough game release that is meant to find major bugs. Beta is a late release meant to find the last of the major bugs on a much larger scale (betas usually involve tens of thousands of users at once). All of them are before a 1.0 release. "

again your not playing the game your testing the early core mechanics, nothing else. this is the part that decides what stays and what goes, i mean am i getting through to you guys at all? at this rate i think FB's biggest mistake was coming out of closed alpha. all this did was make a ton of people think they were playing an actual game because they "paid for it" even know they ignore the EA information before buying.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
17
#69
but its not a game yet, its a project in development, your not playing the game your testing mechanics and features as they develop the core process of the game. this is open Alpha, not even Beta yet, this is the process of the game to test out what will work and what will not work.
Well part of this "Starbase dying" goes on FB's head, while they have let people known SB is in alpha and it is not feature complete, they released SB on Steam and they started the persistent live server, charging 32,99€ for it. Both things are clear signs that the game is fully playable and close to complete, Steam audience is harsh and people expect good experience for their money, even if it's limited because of the EA. E.g. I've bought an EA game They Are Billions, it is a single-player game, there wasn't even a sp campaign at the time I bought it and yet the game is rated "Very Positive" from day 1, they offered one simple game mode and it was so good that people didn't mind waiting a year for the single player campaign. Here people did not receive anything close to a refined and good experience for their money.
 

Venombrew

Master endo
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
369
#70
Both things are clear signs that the game is fully playable and close to complete
this right here is why i know you do not know what your talking about at all, it is very common knowledge that this game will be in open alpha for at least a year and half, this is not new information. then there is beta before the launch, were looking at 2 years minimum before this is considered a playable game. you are literally talking out your arse and you need to bone up on a subject you plan on engaging in.

it is not Frozenbytes fault people don't read things before they buy it. you paid to test a game with perk of also pre-buying, that is it, get over it.

"Early access, also known as early funding, alpha access, alpha founding, or paid alpha, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, and may have access to special materials in the game. The early-access approach is a common way to obtain funding for indie games, and may also be used along with other funding mechanisms, including crowdfunding. Many crowdfunding projects promise to offer access to alpha and/or beta versions of the game as development progresses; however, unlike some of these projects which solicit funds but do not yet have a playable game, all early access games offer an immediately playable version of the unfinished game to players." <- see that right there, this is what makes your statement asinine.
"
What is Early Access?
Steam Early Access enables you to sell your game on Steam while it is still being developed, and provide context to customers that a product should be considered "unfinished." Early Access is a place for games that are in a playable alpha or beta state, are worth the current value of the playable build, and that you plan to continue to develop for release.

Releasing a game in Early Access helps set context for prospective customers and provides them with information about your plans and goals before a "final" release. "

if your not gonna read the terms of something you buy but then complain about it says more about the person then the gaming company.
 
Last edited:

Geronimo553

Well-known endo
Joined
Feb 14, 2020
Messages
61
#72
I wish you guys luck, i really do. But don't pretend you're even close to a sustainable path or doing things properly. This has been, without a doubt, the worst MMO launch that i've ever seen in 20 years of playing the darn things. And yes, like the late great Total Biscuit used to say: If you're charging money, you've launched.
I really feel sad I have to cut any text out of the quote. As it is all wonderful. If I took everything I have said over the past year and a half about the development or game issues from across multiple platforms. Then, crunched it down into one post that covers just about everything wrong regarding the game. I would likely end up with something like this post you have created. I never thought anyone could compress that amount of data onto one or two sheets of paper. So bravo, there are numerous dynamics covered here I hope FB will take notice of. Unfortunately I only expect platitudes as the result. This is someone who has done their home work, taken in the details, and read a vast amount of volume concerning player feedback. I truly compliment this post and cannot express that enough.


It is good to know others, like myself, have the knowledge and experience to accurately describe the various issues plaguing starbase. Because we have watched the same pattern playout many times before for other such products. Describing such various complex issues into digestible material is not an easy feat. I wouldn't mind spending a day to further brain storm and extrapolate this into something even more expansive.
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
576
#73
If this is the worst MMO launch you've seen, isk what to tell ya. I've played many and games that were better funded and developed longer had shittier starts. STO's playerbase ate all of its content in a week. A week. 80-90% of the player base. And there was no end game at first. At all.

So comparably, this wasn't so bad. Its just not feature complete and needs more time in the oven. As STO, and SWTOR needed.
 

Erador

Well-known endo
Joined
Sep 2, 2021
Messages
58
#74
Well, you need to understand what you buying. There was a lot of materials to check with, if you really wanted to find info about current state.

For example, I knew that I should pay $40 for a raw, buggy product. But I was happy to do so, because I knew what wanted and what I will receive.

Of course there are a lot of positive posts about the game, I have left positive one ( but I put note that at this stage, it's not for everyone. The game has high enough entry level).

All my companions are happy with the game (they mining/building and testing). A lot of them doesn't play right now, but if you ask them about the game, they will say - it's awesome! (But we all played about 300 - 1000 hours, depends on the player)

Ofc, you need to wait until more content will come. And this info was said EVERYWHERE. So, idk how you bought it and even didn't notice that...

And again and again, and again... this game is much more complicated, then other games. There is not much product which can be compared by complexity.
It takes a lot of time to develop, a lot of time to fix bugs and etc.
 

Jakaal

Active endo
Joined
Aug 13, 2021
Messages
25
#75
this right here is why i know you do not know what your talking about at all, it is very common knowledge that this game will be in open alpha for at least a year and half, this is not new information. then there is beta before the launch, were looking at 2 years minimum before this is considered a playable game. you are literally talking out your arse and you need to bone up on a subject you plan on engaging in.

it is not Frozenbytes fault people don't read things before they buy it. you paid to test a game with perk of also pre-buying, that is it, get over it.

"Early access, also known as early funding, alpha access, alpha founding, or paid alpha, is a funding model in the video game industry by which consumers can purchase and play a game in the various pre-release development cycles, such as pre-alpha, alpha, and/or beta, while the developer is able to use those funds to continue further development on the game. Those that pay to participate typically help to debug the game, provide feedback and suggestions, and may have access to special materials in the game. The early-access approach is a common way to obtain funding for indie games, and may also be used along with other funding mechanisms, including crowdfunding. Many crowdfunding projects promise to offer access to alpha and/or beta versions of the game as development progresses; however, unlike some of these projects which solicit funds but do not yet have a playable game, all early access games offer an immediately playable version of the unfinished game to players." <- see that right there, this is what makes your statement asinine.
"
What is Early Access?
Steam Early Access enables you to sell your game on Steam while it is still being developed, and provide context to customers that a product should be considered "unfinished." Early Access is a place for games that are in a playable alpha or beta state, are worth the current value of the playable build, and that you plan to continue to develop for release.

Releasing a game in Early Access helps set context for prospective customers and provides them with information about your plans and goals before a "final" release. "

if your not gonna read the terms of something you buy but then complain about it says more about the person then the gaming company.
You can keep quoting that until you're blue in the face but it doesn't change the fact that most people are going to expect a somewhat playable game for the price of Starbase, and they ain't getting that. Nor will they for a very long time. Especially as the core issues of the gameplay are not being addressed by FB at all. Capital ships and moon mining are very unlikely to address the bugginess and poor system design of the game as it stands.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
17
#76
And again and again, and again... this game is much more complicated, then other games. There is not much product which can be compared by complexity.
It takes a lot of time to develop, a lot of time to fix bugs and etc.
I think we all understand that. The thing I and others don't understand is what lead them to the decision of releasing a paid live server on Steam at this stage of development. Indie companies usually offer a support bundle with an access to CA as a bonus, that is a good idea and I'd probably bought that package too, but Steam release will hurt Starbase long term. It will get bad reviews, people aren't exactly thrilled to play an online game that is mixed or negative and live for 1+ year and I think we both agree that a game like Starbase will need as much players as possible, thousands at the very least, once it's out of alpha.
 

Recatek

Meat Popsicle
Joined
Aug 9, 2019
Messages
286
#77
They say actions speak louder than words, so let's compare the two.

Words, paraphrased:
- This isn't a real launch, the game isn't finished

Actions:
- Put game on Steam for sale for $35
- Release grandiose launch trailer
- State and reiterate that there is no intention to wipe the world anymore

Similarly, Early Access may be the term, but the expectation has been set for years now that EA games at a $25+ price point are still polished, playable experiences. The competition is brutal and the bar is high. Steam EA hasn't reflected its original intent as a place for unfinished, prerelease games for most of its life now. It's questionable if it ever did. As the reviews of the game demonstrate, you can't overcome the expectations set by your venue with just a disclaimer. Saying that EA games are immune from expectations, especially ones they set, doesn't make you an industry expert -- it just means you're missing heaps of subtext.
 

shado20

Veteran endo
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
199
#78
all that this game needs to get off the ground even in this stage of things is a working player built station. as soon as player/tribe/faction/company built station can be built, and lived in, build ships at, store ships, basically live 100% out of not needing origin stations for anything. this is the single thing holding back players from playing, building empires and such. all the other fluf is just extra. the stations is the foundation of this games ability to nation build. we looked like we where close to having this back in CA, but at release stations changed 100%.
now station dont make sense, the station core is a minecraft block that holds all the power to create a shield/safezone,
station core should be a lot more to it, ship building is grate, then they got lazy with stations.
post this again
all we need to have a playable "game" is a livable station
it looked like we had this or close to this at the end of CA
but then it all changed 100%
so now stations core don't make sense
and we bought into a game that changed in a week to something almost unplayable, that state of the game went backward as they where taking our money!
(sense we are here, change the station core!)
 
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
576
#79
Agreed. Station usability is the primary issue keeping people away. I don't care about the mechanics (however much I vehemently disagree with the system as a whole currently) if there is nor reason to even make them. Besides building the things used to take them from others.

The moons were supposed to come second. Later. Down the road. Now they and the caps are the focus and I've come to the belief that FB has lost its way.

I don't care about the caps. At all. I'm more interested in how they plan to make sensors work. Functional torpedos. Armor reworks. Large ship viability. I want something for my guys to do that isn't slapping rocks around. Which brings me to the next point, faction shared inventory, so we can more easily manage our logistics.

Just... so much is more important than the two features the progress notes won't shut up about. I literally didn't read this week's yet because the first thing mentioned was capital ships. Again.
 

Erador

Well-known endo
Joined
Sep 2, 2021
Messages
58
#80
Agreed. Station usability is the primary issue keeping people away. I don't care about the mechanics (however much I vehemently disagree with the system as a whole currently) if there is nor reason to even make them. Besides building the things used to take them from others.

The moons were supposed to come second. Later. Down the road. Now they and the caps are the focus and I've come to the belief that FB has lost its way.

I don't care about the caps. At all. I'm more interested in how they plan to make sensors work. Functional torpedos. Armor reworks. Large ship viability. I want something for my guys to do that isn't slapping rocks around. Which brings me to the next point, faction shared inventory, so we can more easily manage our logistics.

Just... so much is more important than the two features the progress notes won't shut up about. I literally didn't read this week's yet because the first thing mentioned was capital ships. Again.
Cap ships more important than stations. And they should be implemented first, before real pvp balance/polishing rework. Because the way capital ships will work in universe, is the cornerstone for a lot of core mechanics/gameplays
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top