State of SB - An Alpha player's point of view.
- Thread starter Saltylelele
- Start date
- Tags broken bug frozenbyte starbase
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 19
Here's the thing you guys seem to fail to understand, unless this game eventually hooks some casual players, its going to be doomed to low player counts whether it gets actual content or not. Easy build mode for stations isn't the end of the world and you can still build quite intricate stations with it.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2021
- Messages
- 61
This is simply not true. Of course you could "slowly expand" with this method if needed. Also, a game is usually centered around what the players want if it is meant to be successful.
Casual players aren't the ones that will build a whole station my man. These people just want to log in, fly around and do their things and then log off. And dedicated players do not need Easy Build Mode.
Casual players aren't the ones that will build a whole station my man. These people just want to log in, fly around and do their things and then log off. And dedicated players do not need Easy Build Mode.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 19
I think you misunderstand what i mean. I mean its not compatible with the expandable build area since a large station 10 times the size of the initial area isn't exactly going to fit
A station isn't hard to get. A casual player will definitely want one and probably get one since its a relatively small investment to start out. You have a very dismissive view on what a casual player actually is.
A station isn't hard to get. A casual player will definitely want one and probably get one since its a relatively small investment to start out. You have a very dismissive view on what a casual player actually is.
A station isn't hard to get.... you haven't played many games. this will lead to massive spam.
for bigger players this is a massive headache more than being at war with anyone.
if a large group has to deploy a supper capital ship every time some casual player plops down a space cube in there territory. no the big groups will jest find another game to play as we already see this problems with the devs playing Oprah and giving everybody a station!
with every casual plopping down a space cube, the cry's from the casuals will soon be "i cant find a place to build my station without traveling along way"
the name of the game is Starbase, not Space Spam!
mite as well turn off pvp you the casuals will feel safe!
for bigger players this is a massive headache more than being at war with anyone.
if a large group has to deploy a supper capital ship every time some casual player plops down a space cube in there territory. no the big groups will jest find another game to play as we already see this problems with the devs playing Oprah and giving everybody a station!
with every casual plopping down a space cube, the cry's from the casuals will soon be "i cant find a place to build my station without traveling along way"
the name of the game is Starbase, not Space Spam!
mite as well turn off pvp you the casuals will feel safe!
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2020
- Messages
- 40
Idk, I don't really think any less of the Devs. EA seemed like something they had to do and this game is complex. It will take time before it's where I want it to be and i've accepted that, this game is unlike anything else ever made. I know we have Voxel building games but Starbase is next level on that front, I don't want the devs to get discouraged I have so much hope for the future still.
From a commercial point of view, they already have your money. It's not so important whether existing players stay or play on, than it is they can fix things enough to attract new buyers in the medium to long-term, and then again when 1.0 is released. What weight they put into the effect feedback on Steam and other sources may have on future demand may have some small influence but not a great deal. The launch was clearly financially time sensitive, and they needed to raise money at that point or not at all. Otherwise why launch the game when the poor condition of key launch features was already known and well documented. The alternative would imply an eye watering level of developer incompetence, which would seem unlikely.
Building and launching a game is first and foremost a business proposition. FB will weigh up the commercial risks and make a decision guided by the expected outcome(s).
My guess is that launch raised sufficient funds to get them through the financial hurdles they faced at the time. Whilst they have an obligation to maintain the current functionality of the launched game, they will ultimately focus on a roadmap and timeline which will enable them to reach their next financial target.
As valid as all your opinions may be, your participation or otherwise in that process through playing the game, feeding back on bugs, being the next Starbase YouTuber or content creator, or latest poll to canvass current opinion of the state of the game, is not going to significantly shift the needle in their plans under any circumstances.
Play or don't play. You've given them your money, what you do now is up to you. FB will be thinking about what needs to be done to secure the next group of buyers (I mean players). That is less time sensitive than many would have you think. That timeline will be driven far more by commercial need rather than user base opinion.
My counsel, for what it is worth, is don't waste your time thinking that forum posts like this one is going to have a significant impact on FB's development strategy or direction. It will not. Don't kid yourself that server numbers or whether or not you choose to play will have a similar impact. It will not.
We can choose to feedback to FB on bugs, and offer our opinions as to what we would like and not like. That's one of the benefits of a player-base on a public alpha is that you have hundreds of testers who have paid you for early access to your game, both in money and time. So remember, you've paid for early access, accepting all the risks that come with what early access means, with an expectation that the game will be completed within an indeterminate period of time based on the published road-map.
Right now, it is what it is.
Having been in closed alpha, and spent around 250 hours in open alpha, the current mine build loop has run its course for me and I look forward to more significant features being added in the future, at which time I may return. I only hope this happens before the next new game/distraction comes along to occupy my finite spare time. I am under no illusion that my decision to play or not has any impact on what FB does next.
Good luck everyone. Fly safe. Enjoy whatever game you're playing.
Building and launching a game is first and foremost a business proposition. FB will weigh up the commercial risks and make a decision guided by the expected outcome(s).
My guess is that launch raised sufficient funds to get them through the financial hurdles they faced at the time. Whilst they have an obligation to maintain the current functionality of the launched game, they will ultimately focus on a roadmap and timeline which will enable them to reach their next financial target.
As valid as all your opinions may be, your participation or otherwise in that process through playing the game, feeding back on bugs, being the next Starbase YouTuber or content creator, or latest poll to canvass current opinion of the state of the game, is not going to significantly shift the needle in their plans under any circumstances.
Play or don't play. You've given them your money, what you do now is up to you. FB will be thinking about what needs to be done to secure the next group of buyers (I mean players). That is less time sensitive than many would have you think. That timeline will be driven far more by commercial need rather than user base opinion.
My counsel, for what it is worth, is don't waste your time thinking that forum posts like this one is going to have a significant impact on FB's development strategy or direction. It will not. Don't kid yourself that server numbers or whether or not you choose to play will have a similar impact. It will not.
We can choose to feedback to FB on bugs, and offer our opinions as to what we would like and not like. That's one of the benefits of a player-base on a public alpha is that you have hundreds of testers who have paid you for early access to your game, both in money and time. So remember, you've paid for early access, accepting all the risks that come with what early access means, with an expectation that the game will be completed within an indeterminate period of time based on the published road-map.
Right now, it is what it is.
Having been in closed alpha, and spent around 250 hours in open alpha, the current mine build loop has run its course for me and I look forward to more significant features being added in the future, at which time I may return. I only hope this happens before the next new game/distraction comes along to occupy my finite spare time. I am under no illusion that my decision to play or not has any impact on what FB does next.
Good luck everyone. Fly safe. Enjoy whatever game you're playing.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 19
Yes, you're absolutely right. Of course they want your feedback. Having that many testers in your game, who have paid for the opportunity to play it during early access, it would be crazy for them not to. But how they choose to respond to that feedback, and prioritise their road map will be entirely commercially driven, and will have very little to do with a vocal few on these forums or server numbers.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 19
"Commercially Driven" as if that's somehow bad for a persistent world mmo. They do require money and of course they are going to priorities things that that attract players (I.E caps). They do listen to the community, but listening and obeying are two very different things. They need to listen to us, but if they obeyed us the game would never actually get done because we'll be stuck fine tuning armor till the cows come home.
well i'm with TPG a gaming community. as of now we have less than 10% of the community in this game. if this game turns out to be good , the few of us that are in it we can pull way more players in. not only from TPG , but friends and enemy's community's alike will flood into this game, but sadly i can see like i could see "Last Oasis" was going to be a short lived game , Starbase is going down the short-lived game rood with there casual player space cube stations.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2021
- Messages
- 61
I prefer the term "realistic" instead of "dismissive". Also, a casual player is defined by the very fact that he is not dedicated to the game (which is not a bad thing). It is not that I dislike them in any way. In fact, I want them to participate and let them have their 20 or 30 minutes of fun each day. The problem that I (like so many others here) see is that FB is trying to hard to cater to these players which ultimately means that the more complex game elements suffer as a consequence of that (Because if you have to dumb down everything for easy build mode you are not very inclined to create complex mechanics in the first place). And even the easiest station building mode in the world will take up too much time for casual play hence why I think that FB shouldn't cater to these players too much because they do not want it anymore than the rest of the player base.
We should think of this game as an art exhibition. Those who really want to dedicate themselves to the design of Ships and Stations and put in the hours should define the ways and looks of this game. Those who want to merely participate in a shallow way will be content by simply buying what others made before. And who is to say that Station Blueprints could not be traded in the future like those for Ships?
I think that this is the best way to cater to both worlds.
We should think of this game as an art exhibition. Those who really want to dedicate themselves to the design of Ships and Stations and put in the hours should define the ways and looks of this game. Those who want to merely participate in a shallow way will be content by simply buying what others made before. And who is to say that Station Blueprints could not be traded in the future like those for Ships?
I think that this is the best way to cater to both worlds.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 19
A casual player is someone who plays the game, but lacks the desire for competition. A casual player can play for 19 hours a day, but if they aren't interested in the competitive nature of the game they are still a casual player. In eve, I was a a casual player. I played a fucking lot, but i spent most of it just chilling out mining. I was very much a casual player but i didn't just log in fly around and log off. If you think I as a casual player didn't matter in the slightest to the eve player base then you don't know shit about the this type of game. Casual players chilling and mining make up a LOT of the ore economy in that game. Its not just the hard core min maxing corps. I called your stance dismissive because it is dismissive. You don't think a casual player actually contributes to the game.
