Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums


DFA Backers
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Riivan

  • Rank


  • Steam Community Tag/URL
  • Xbox Live Tag
  • Display Backer Tags
  1. That's entirely false. Actual QA testing when done properly is worlds apart from simple bug testing as done by joe random. It's a process that's done tortuously and over and over in a controlled environment and then carefully documented. Consistent attempts to replicate a very specific bug are done on various different rigs and in different environments, QA when done right can be extremely expensive and time consuming. The "public" beta when done right produces a lot of noise, but also a lot of signal which provides useful information to the paid QA staff who can then home in with their unit tests. I understand the triple A QA process. We're talking about an indie game here. You're not going to get a full QA shakedown. What you're going to get is a basic QA which is no different than the playtesting I described.
  2. But there doesn't seem to be any time for testing. Essentially. What you have laid out is: 1: Oh crap. Out of money. Wrap everything up. We're done. 2:Release game as "1.0" going from alpha without any beta testing. 3: The customers of the "1.0" version are essentially beta testers. There is no getting around this. you're just calling a rock a boulder. 4: The game probably won't work. At all. Alpha 6 has been horrific in terms of stability. Linux doesn't even work still. It took almost A MONTH before anyone on the team acknowledged there was an issue. So no. You are going in to beta. But you're being dishonest and calling it 1.0. Only way I will accept a 1.0 release is if this was not an open development project and you had already reserved resources to pay playtesters and bugfinders. But you haven't. You don't even have enough to continue adding onto the project, how can you have the money to pay people hwo know all operating systems to test your game and find where it is breaking? That is a lot of man hours to test on multiple hardware and system settings. TLDR: Dishonest response is dishonest. Still is going into beta, but calling it 1.0 1. They stated they saw this coming and sank all funds back into the game including extra in the hopes that things would pick up after a few releases. Didn't happen. Your version is a gross simplification. They erred when they didn't let us know when the initial problem arose. 2. Beta testing as you have defined it is just playtesting and bug fixing. That has been happening the entire process. Every early access player especially those that post bugs on forums and whatnot is a "beta" tester. 3. Corrected above. 4. They're sinking all their time into bug fixing and adding in the last two features. Best not to say the sky is falling until it is. And I don't mean to demean playtesters or QA people, but anyone can do QA. There are some people that are more adept at finding bugs, but there isn't anything different about someone paid to test and people playing an alpha or beta that report bugs (paycheck aside). And your indie/mid-tier developers aren't spending money on QA testers. They get their employees, friends, family and do Alpha/Beta builds.
  3. You could get BA (the full game) for $15 during the Kickstarter; and that included access to the beta, access to the 2PP documentary, access to the private backer forum. So if you'd sell BA Act 1 now for $15 or $20, and raise its price to $25 once Act 2 is out, no backer should have felt betrayed by anything. As for "making its numbers": it is hitting the absolut minimum, the pessimistic estimate. It is by no means hitting the numbers that DF hoped for: You could see the disappointment in the doc. It really looks like Adventure Games are dead. BTW, is there a way to see how many times a game is on Steam Wishlists? (Like, "1.234 people have this on their wish list"?) As the game still isn't released, I don't understand how you can make those assumptions. I'm an adventure game fanatic and has never bought an episodic game before all episodes are out, besides where I was forced into it because of changes in their respective kickstarters. If I hadn't backed DF at kickstarter I wouldn't have bought Broken Age yet as the game isn't complete. I think, and know, that a lot of other people acts and thinks the same on the subject. As Dreamfall Chapters is another kickstarter adventure which changed into an episodic game after the campaign ended, I wish them luck, they'll need it. If I'd known beforehand, I would never have backed it. Same with Broken Age and perhaps Broken Sword 5. Episodic games, no thank you. There are a few exceptions where it worked ok (Telltale), but even then, I never bought anything before all episodes were out. Seems like you understand making assumptions quite well.
  4. I empathize, but this is a bit much. They're a small studio, popular, but they're still a small studio. If you are a DF fan you know that they don't just make decisions lightly. They do actually think of their fans. You say there are a lot of you that would have purchased the game, where are on the numbers on that? I can't spend the hundreds of thousands to make a game in the hopes that someone will buy it. This works for an indie dev because they have no overhead and either have a job on the side or some other means to support. A small studio can't afford the same "luxury." They can shop the game around maybe to see if someone will invest, but if the money isn't there production can't continue. This happens all the time in games, we just have a front row seat thanks to Early Access. I scrolled for about two seconds and found a few positive reviews, but that is neither here nor there. A glut of negative reviews have come about from people angry about the release of the game. Entirely justified and I get it. I'm sure they don't appreciate seeing people not enjoy their game and as a dev (not at DF or related in any way) who has watched a few games fold beneath him you asking if we're embarrassed kind of pours salt on the wound. We don't do this for the money, it's not a high paying job. A programmer could make twice as much elsewhere, an artist could make more doing graphic design or UI/UX, etc. We do it because we want to make something good and when it doesn't/gets shut down it sucks. Give them a break. It's ok to be upset and frustrated, but don't take it out on the devs. If your trust is so easily broken after one misstep I'm sorry, I have nothing I can do for you. They've had 3 crowdfunding endeavors so far with Broken Age and Massive Chalice successes. They're 2 for 3 that's pretty darn good in my book. I can trust them pretty easily. They're a company who has done great work in the past, continues to do great work and has delivered on 2 campaigns. And you can't hold someone to a promise that you made in your own mind. A list of features they label as things they'd like to implement in game is not a promise. Now they could have communicated better and I think everyone agrees there. But Early Access states that you shouldn't back a game unless you like it in the form it's in currently because there is no guarantee it will see release. DF themselves stated that they'd continue developing so long as the funds and support was there. They have the support but no funds. Money doesn't come from nothing. I hope with time to really think on this whole situation dispassionately you'll realize that it sucks to be sure, but it's not that bad. And I hope Tim answers some of your questions. Devs really don't do this stuff for themselves, we really do get a kick out of seeing people enjoy our creations.
  5. From Steam's description of Early Access. It meets every expectation I have of an Early Access title. Much like the rest of game dev, it's a gamble. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. There wasn't enough support to keep the game going. No promises were made and Steam clearly outlines what Early Access is. No one is saying that mistakes weren't made and they could have communicated better that while they were hoping funding would pick up it was looking like the project was coming to a close. At the same time that's a gamble. It could deter people from purchasing the game and then it ends at Alpha 3 instead of 6. Flip side it could spur people on to share about the game to try and save it. It's a tough position to be in. A little civility is in order. Having your game come to an end after pouring your heart and soul into it is rough. I've been there too many times. It's ok to be upset and frustrated. It isn't ok to take it out on the team or to be belligerent with your questions. To accuse them and DF of not putting their fans first is a little disingenuous and ignores the facts. Look at the whole catalog of games, their kickstarters/fortnight bundles, and various ways they give back to fans at cons/events. When I look at that I don't see a company that sees us all as dollar signs.
  6. I would love to see something other than QTEs for combat or some more varied mechanics so not everything is a QTE. But I don't particularly like them, they bore me. I would love to see some stuff like in Chrono Trigger where you learn new abilities and have 2 and 3 person abilities that combine strengths of the costumes. Might be a bit too much, but it was always fun in that game and kept me engaged in the combat.
  7. Second the DF themed costumes. Raz, Riggs, Hipster Lumberjack, Mog Chothra, Middle Manager, etc. Any of them would be great. Just to spitball... 8Bit Hero, Mad Max style road warrior, Bob Ross!, Taco/Gyro
  • Create New...