Posts made by Zori

@killergoldfish

talk to me again once you've actually played the game and know what im talking about.

I've mentioned this before on the last test as well.

With the direction of the game, it's almost a must to join a guild or a city, almost every single amenity is unavailable for "solo" players.

While I agree that no solo-player should be able to do things that a group of players should be able to do, they shouldn't be barred at the gates either.
Solo players can't even get an access to a tanning tub iirc, let alone basic things. Essentially what's the point of owning your own city plot?

Here is what I posted last time...

@Zori said in What is the point of having your own plot of land?:

On the last test we were allowed to build tubs, weaver, crafting table, etc. on our plot of land but now it seems that having your own plot of land is just a place to have your own personal storage.

I have slept at fireplaces in other places more so than my own and the only reason why i'd come back to my own house is just storage.

If NPCs are going to be 'town only', and that reason is one of the key defining features of choosing a city house vs an out of city house, whats the point of not allowing players to have tubs and other crafting furniture in their own home?

@Zori said in What is the point of having your own plot of land?:

On second thought, there is practically no need for people to have their own plot of land if you're a member of a city.

Need storage? the bank is now private, and one person can just build a house and have shared storages in it then that's it.

I find it more useful to have a house outside of a city lot that i can just relocate to whenever i find it necessary. In theory, cities are great but the implementation atm definitely needs a lot of fine tuning.

This entire 'Tub' series of 'stolen leathers' is another issue, if players have the ability to have their own processing furniture in their home, then I can see the need to have your own house and would definitely eliminate a lot of the unnecessary problems.

Cities/Towns would have NPCs after all that out-of-towners wouldnt have, that's distinct enough for a city life vs wilderness life.

From my perspective, players having the option to have all of these furniture in their home might actually entice people to visit cities more so than just using it as a way point for their travels.

dont get me wrong, cities have definitely made travelling a bit more bearable this time around, but after it's built? theres nothing left to it other than a way point. The 'complex' social structure that it would supposedly bring didn't actually provided anything other than group of players building up a city then going off to travel.

I understand that this is an alpha state and not all features are implemented but right now, this is my feedback on what i've experienced on the state of cities/towns.

tldr; make homes more useful other than just a 'very far away storage area'.

With the way that this game is going, where you're forced to join a group/guild/city just so you can have the very basic necessities of the game, i really don't see much of a future for it.

Cause people will join the game and only experience a small portion of the game and go "That's it? what else can I do? i guess i'll get a refund." cause let's face it, there are many games where you're barred at the gates and the only way for you to even know what you're missing out on is to join a guild/group of people when NOT EVERY PLAYER IS INCLINED TO JOIN ONE STRAIGHT AWAY.

with the way things are going, i really don't see much point for me to be trying out this game, and just come back when it's fully released to see if theres actually any hope for it.

@Stacy555 said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

@Specter No fighting happening here .... Just @Zori telling everyone with an opposing opinion they are stupid, have a low IQ, or just plain half-wits.

See I was having a discussion with another person about how wrong they are with their assumption, but naturally you wanted to feel involved so here you are.

Just cause people have an opposing opinion doesn't mean i'd call em a half wit, which is what you dont understand cause again, you know, you're Stacy.

When they get called a half wit is if they cant read and respond properly to what is being addressed to them, but ofc, stacy being stacy so here we are.

i mean why are you even here if you're not contributing to the discussion other than add fuel to the fire and antagonise people who are trying to have a discussion.

I mean if the first thing you're going to contribute to a thread is...

@Stacy555 said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

Great to see @Zori back on his high horse again....... ahh I've missed his condescending attitude.

But great to see Stacy wanting to feel involved again with something too big for her.

@d3Sync said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

And all of this above is your attempt to push onto me what you can't handle yourself. By claiming I'm the one in the wrong. I've now called out your inane rabble in a very specific way. You asked. You've received. I suspect that you won't learn from this though. Your unreasonable and malicious nature is now directly in front of everyone. I hope you enjoyed this. I certainly didn't.
This will be the last time I post here. I have no interest in furthering this discussion. You can take it as a 'win' if you'd like Zori. I'm sure you will anyways.

Know what's really sad about this?

You think you're responding with accurate/logical responses when all you've done is jump from one topic to another and deflect things with asinine responses.

And like I said before, if you honestly think that your "research" is just to look up YT videos, etc. etc. then it is no wonder that you think that "alpha, beta, early release" are meaningless. I mean just listen to you saying that this game should be on beta already.

And here's the other part of it, once everything has been listed for you the best that you've done was project your own emotions/agenda thinking that you'll sway others, sure you'll sway other half-wits like you but that's no surprise.

But heres what truly shows your character as a person "You can take it as a win if you'd like". that's the mentality of low IQ people, thinking that this is a me vs you, and that one person has to 'win'.

It's why they never learn anything when they've been called out for their own stupidity.
so good luck claiming that you know what you're saying when the best you've done is watch YT videos and call it "research".

The mere fact that you felt attacked and think that this was some sort of a competition really does show a lot about your quality as a person but hey, that's how it works with people like you i guess.

talk to me again once you've finally get past an IQ of 85, i'll wait for you here in my high throne.

btw, once you can finally address these points without crying maybe then people will actually take you seriously.

1. You haven't played Fractured yet you think it should be in beta already. -- I mean do you even know how much content is missing to call it a beta? On second thought, do you even know what "BETA TEST" means?
2. You insist that people who spent money on an alpha game are guaranteed a game at the end of the project tells me that you have not researched the fail rate of games on its alpha state, let alone how it can potentially deviate from its 'original plans'.
3. You compare games with another game that was obviously 'mislabelled' on its state.
4. Have you even bothered reading the alpha test section of the forum and how much bugs we've experienced? or what delayed the last test by about a week because a game breaking bug was found hours before an open alpha test was about to launch?
5. Do you even know the average play time of people who joined the alpha test last time to claim that it's "easily playable for hours on end".

@Stacy555 said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

Yeah that's me full of joy ... just sad I'm in the same Guild as a God sized gobshite like you to be honest.

You can always leave quite frankly. It's not like you have anything to contribute anyway.

@Stacy555 said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

@Zori As always I care very little if at all what you think or feel or ... in fact anything.

thanks for letting me know, stace.
great input as always.

@Stacy555 said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

Great to see @Zori back on his high horse again....... ahh I've missed his condescending attitude.

and as always you have nothing to contribute.

@d3Sync said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

@Zori said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

@d3Sync said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

I think the phrasing alpha, beta, early access are essentially meaningless. It's very difficult to slam people for their expectations being too high or low because every project is different. Some alpha projects don't have many bugs, but are missing content. Some alpha's are completely full of bugs. Some are playable, and some will leave you so frustrated that you have to get up and go do somethings else out of frustration. Everyone has a different opinion of what each stage should mean. Part of that is a developer not being transparent enough about what to expect out of their product. Some of that is because the consumer expects too much. But ultimately, if you spend money and you are given access to a game, it should be in a proper state to test. Sometimes developers don't deliver on that final point. I haven't tested Fractured yet, but based on a lack of NDA and what I've seen. It seems the game falls closer into the category of beta. Requires more content, but isn't riddled with bugs and easily playable for hours on end. Usually, from my experience, the people who defend very poor products are just mad because they feel that their favorite toy is being stolen. They get emotional and lash out at criticism. Often times it's well deserved.

"But ultimately, if you spend money and you are given access to a game, it should be in a proper state to test."

You are what we call "a poorly researched consumer".
The mere fact that you don't understand what stages mean says more than enough already but if you think that "I spent money, therefore I should have a "proper state" to test it". is indeed an indicator that you have never researched or tried to understand what happens during test phases.

As for the other pointers that supports my case that you don't do any research before jumping in to an Alpha test game.

1. You haven't played Fractured yet you think it should be in beta already. -- I mean do you even know how much content is missing to call it a beta? On second thought, do you even know what "BETA TEST" means?
2. You insist that people who spent money on an alpha game are guaranteed a game at the end of the project tells me that you have not researched the fail rate of games on its alpha state, let alone how it can potentially deviate from its 'original plans'.
3. You compare games with another game that was obviously 'mislabelled' on its state.
4. Have you even bothered reading the alpha test section of the forum and how much bugs we've experienced? or what delayed the last test by about a week because a game breaking bug was found hours before an open alpha test was about to launch?
5. Do you even know the average play time of people who joined the alpha test last time to claim that it's "easily playable for hours on end".

You honestly need to research what you're saying and i'm not talking about going down the rabbit hole of Youtubers who have the same level of research skills as you.

and the reason why you guys fall for 'scammy' games on its so called "alpha" is because of your inability to conduct research so you're easily goaded into forking out your money.

You may be aware of the risks but you fail to understand the minute nuances behind development stages so you rely on your gut feelings to make a decision instead of dissecting and assessing what is being presented to you objectively.

You are legit what scammers want; poorly researched, gullible people.

the mere fact that you sounded so confident about your opinions without having tested the game is just ridiculous. "~in my opinion, the game should be in its... early beta." -re-adjusts monocle-

edit:

You may be wondering why my tone is so heavy and thats because people like you are legit one of the biggest reasons why games fail.

Poorly researched people ready to complain about things that they don't understand, because they dont understand development process they expect, push and demand for developers to reach certain milestones and rush production cause if theres 2 thousand other poorly researched consumers like you pitch in their poorly researched opinions, chances are other not so bright individuals like you will feel encouraged to start moaning about how much they dont understand in developmental stages.

Do you see where im getting at? idiotic statements needs to be corrected asap otherwise it'll propagate into a larger idiotic statement that will eventually cause problems for the development of the project.

I was speaking in generalities. I'm not sure why you feel that attacking me is the right course of action. I know exactly what these stages mean, as I've been playing and testing games since the mid 90's. I've done more than my share of research, and I've been around long enough to see development practices change over time. That doesn't change the fact that new consumers will not understand what to expect simply due to there now being thousands of games in a stage of early access, and all thousand of them are unique and in various stages of development. Not talking about what label is slapped on it. I'm talking about an alpha game, being in near beta development. Then the next alpha game is more of a pre-alpha game, as it's nearly unplayable. The relatively new practice of pay to play alpha's has muddied the waters of what you should expect.

This has nothing to do with Fractured and has nothing to do with whether I've played the game or not. It has to do with my decades worth of experience in testing.

I did not say, anywhere in my response, that an alpha is a promise to a fully finished game. I would challenge you to quote me. You are just upset, and you are making things up to try and support your argument. But here, I'm not going to let you lie. I simply said that in an alpha, if you are a developer, you should provide a build of the game that is playable and testable. Nowhere did I say finished, complete, or full release.

I'm aware of some of the slight delays of Fractured, and I don't consider that to be an issue. I've also watched about every single Youtube video that I could find. Which is probably over 50 hours of unedited gameplay. Based on my experience, there seems to be very few actual gamebreaking bugs. However, it does seem to be missing some content. Which is exactly how I described Fractured. I did not try and hide my lack of actual gameplay experience, but I believe there are many things that my eyes alone can glean from all of that gameplay that would lead me to a reasonable expectation of what Fractured will provide. You appear to be too upset to recognize that fact though. From many streamers and content creators, they have said that they played for hours. And if you just look at the time stamps, you'd see that many of these people played for multiple hours. Sometimes up to 3-4 hours or more.

I feel that this is a perfect example of unreasonable fans of a game. Nothing I said was an attack on the game. But you viewed my generality as one. You then became so distraught by your incorrect perception of what I actually said, that you started filling in the gaps with things you've made up to make me seem worse than I actually am. You need to step back and re-read people's comments before you go and attack them for things they didn't actually do or say.

Not only does it make you look bad, but it makes the entire community look bad.

Are you capable of reading and responding to what anyone has said to you at all or are you just going to keep adding on whatever you felt like?

I've addressed your points on your main response in a logical and thoughtful manner yet you did not respond to anything that i've stated at all but merely deflected them.

"I was speaking of generalities" when we're talking about a specific situation?

again let's go back to these points.

You haven't played Fractured yet you think it should be in beta already. -- I mean do you even know how much content is missing to call it a beta? On second thought, do you even know what "BETA TEST" means?

I haven't tested Fractured yet ....It seems the game falls closer into the category of beta.

You insist that people who spent money on an alpha game are guaranteed a game at the end of the project tells me that you have not researched the fail rate of games on its alpha state, let alone how it can potentially deviate from its 'original plans'.

But ultimately, if you spend money and you are given access to a game, it should be in a proper state to test. (test* but doesnt even know what Alpha or Beta is in terms of testing.)

You compare games with another game that was obviously 'mislabelled' on its state.

Some alpha projects... Some are playable...

Have you even bothered reading the alpha test section of the forum and how much bugs we've experienced? or what delayed the last test by about a week because a game breaking bug was found hours before an open alpha test was about to launch?

Do you even know the average play time of people who joined the alpha test last time to claim that it's "easily playable for hours on end".re fact that you think 'research' is just "watching hours of gameplay" and looking at their timestamps brings me back to my point; "You honestly need to research what you're saying and i'm not talking about going down the rabbit hole of Youtubers who have the same level of research skills as you."

Seeing as you've "tested games since the 90's" then I wonder why you seem to struggle to understand some of the very basic concepts of development stages, and even claim that "speaking in general" this game is "early beta" when it's nowhere near beta?

now you feel attacked when someone points out your flaws? toughen up, not everyone is going to sugar coat the hard pills to swallow for you.

Know what's actually bad for the community?

People who spouts out their opinion without any actual experience that encourages other half wits like them to spout out more stupid things.

"I feel that this is a perfect example of unreasonable fans of a game"
Your feelings have very little weight when people are dealing with facts and logic.

But thanks for your "feelings". Tell me again who's being an "unreasonable" fan.
The one that logically and rationally elaborated their thought process, or the one that jumped into conclusion?

"You then became so distraught by your incorrect perception of what I actually said..."
The only one distraught here is the person making assumptions about something they have very little knowledge of and are know being called out for it.

Address what i've said to you, not how you feel cause clearly your feelings mean very little to me.

edit:

"This has nothing to do with Fractured and has nothing to do with whether I've played the game or not. It has to do with my decades worth of experience in testing."

". You are just upset, and you are making things up to try and support your argument."

lmfao

what else did i say, not say and made up?
since you're the expert on feelings here, why dont you got ahead and tell me more about how i feel, particularly about the situation.

dont play that bs where you try and deflect or try to talk without specificities in fear of being called out. Remember, everything that you've said is written, we can always just scroll back up.

anyway, this brings me back to my previous point of why im so heavy handed on people like you.

You spout out things you dont understand and fail to be objective, but rely on their emotions to make a decision for them "you are upset waaah waaaah waaaaahhhh"

and if you think that ..."I've also watched about every single Youtube video that I could find." is research, i've got some bad news for you pal.

@Jetah said in New Alpha Price & Founder Pack Sale:

you want numbers when the systems are in place.

???
seriously?
omg

Yeah i definitely agree with you on this part though.
"DS doesn't need players, they need testers."

You have a great day dude lmfao

@FibS said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

@d3Sync said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

I think the phrasing alpha, beta, early access are essentially meaningless [...] Everyone has a different opinion of what each stage should mean.

That's because people don't look up what words mean. Here is what the terms actually objectively mean:

• alpha: Extremely early development. Testing to make sure technology and developer ability supports game vision. No guarantee game actually runs without crashing, losing data, or obviously horribly glitching.
• beta: Mid-to-late development. Game is stable and playable. Most or all major game mechanics are in, but not necessarily every minor feature. Game is not yet optimized.
• early access: 99% done, mostly optimized, and ready to ship. Some lucky few get to play it early. A few bugs or other issues may come up that may be patched before the official release date.

As long as developers are being honest and using these terms correctly (which they're admittedly often not), they're being as transparent as they should.

I would consider Fractured to remain in alpha until the following are all implemented and working on some basic level:

• All three planets
• Asteroids
• Alignment and Syndesia's justice system
• At least one Beastman+Abomination and one Demon+Angel (to test the Alignment system)
• Eclipses
• Towns

... and maybe a few other major mechanics I'm overlooking

the guy hasn't even done any of his research so he doesn't see that the game is missing over 90% of its content. He thinks it should be in "early beta" now lmao
he hasnt played any of the tests either. he's just seen a compilation of YT clips for the promotionals.

@d3Sync said in What to expect on an "alpha state" game?:

I think the phrasing alpha, beta, early access are essentially meaningless. It's very difficult to slam people for their expectations being too high or low because every project is different. Some alpha projects don't have many bugs, but are missing content. Some alpha's are completely full of bugs. Some are playable, and some will leave you so frustrated that you have to get up and go do somethings else out of frustration. Everyone has a different opinion of what each stage should mean. Part of that is a developer not being transparent enough about what to expect out of their product. Some of that is because the consumer expects too much. But ultimately, if you spend money and you are given access to a game, it should be in a proper state to test. Sometimes developers don't deliver on that final point. I haven't tested Fractured yet, but based on a lack of NDA and what I've seen. It seems the game falls closer into the category of beta. Requires more content, but isn't riddled with bugs and easily playable for hours on end. Usually, from my experience, the people who defend very poor products are just mad because they feel that their favorite toy is being stolen. They get emotional and lash out at criticism. Often times it's well deserved.

"But ultimately, if you spend money and you are given access to a game, it should be in a proper state to test."

You are what we call "a poorly researched consumer".
The mere fact that you don't understand what stages mean says more than enough already but if you think that "I spent money, therefore I should have a "proper state" to test it". is indeed an indicator that you have never researched or tried to understand what happens during test phases.

As for the other pointers that supports my case that you don't do any research before jumping in to an Alpha test game.

1. You haven't played Fractured yet you think it should be in beta already. -- I mean do you even know how much content is missing to call it a beta? On second thought, do you even know what "BETA TEST" means?
2. You insist that people who spent money on an alpha game are guaranteed a game at the end of the project tells me that you have not researched the fail rate of games on its alpha state, let alone how it can potentially deviate from its 'original plans'.
3. You compare games with another game that was obviously 'mislabelled' on its state.
4. Have you even bothered reading the alpha test section of the forum and how much bugs we've experienced? or what delayed the last test by about a week because a game breaking bug was found hours before an open alpha test was about to launch?
5. Do you even know the average play time of people who joined the alpha test last time to claim that it's "easily playable for hours on end".

You honestly need to research what you're saying and i'm not talking about going down the rabbit hole of Youtubers who have the same level of research skills as you.

and the reason why you guys fall for 'scammy' games on its so called "alpha" is because of your inability to conduct research so you're easily goaded into forking out your money.

You may be aware of the risks but you fail to understand the minute nuances behind development stages so you rely on your gut feelings to make a decision instead of dissecting and assessing what is being presented to you objectively.

You are legit what scammers want; poorly researched, gullible people.

the mere fact that you sounded so confident about your opinions without having tested the game is just ridiculous. "~in my opinion, the game should be in its... early beta." -re-adjusts monocle-

edit:

You may be wondering why my tone is so heavy and thats because people like you are legit one of the biggest reasons why games fail.

Poorly researched people ready to complain about things that they don't understand, because they dont understand development process they expect, push and demand for developers to reach certain milestones and rush production cause if theres 2 thousand other poorly researched consumers like you pitch in their poorly researched opinions, chances are other not so bright individuals like you will feel encouraged to start moaning about how much they dont understand in developmental stages.

Do you see where im getting at? idiotic statements needs to be corrected asap otherwise it'll propagate into a larger idiotic statement that will eventually cause problems for the development of the project.

Would be a nice thing to have but we haven't even seen what a manor, palace, castle, etc. would look like, I doubt we'd hear anything about a new furniture set soon.

I feel like a lot of those things are 'beta' or 'release' thing more so than an alpha thing.

@Ostaff said in Nice:

@Zori

GASP!

@Ostaff said in Nice:

@Zori

469 would be nicer.... just saying

Sadly, I never saw my 69 or 77, as I kinda went to 115 in a very extremely short timespan.

gotta admit it's fake xD

nice

"alpha test" has turned into a cliche cause a lot of us have experienced games that didn't make it but that is exactly what is expected of ANY projects, not just games in it's alpha state, just cause your past experience of a game isn't good doesn't necessarily mean that the next one would be bad, but of course if you use the exact same parameters to base your decisions on over and over again, i'm sure you'll end up to the exact same conclusion.

What you need to understand if you're joining a game on its alpha state is that there is always a risk/chance that it will not continue, or it will not be what you expect it to be as there are many factors that could change the progression of a project.

I mean who would have thought that global pandemic would happen and cancel so many events? Tokyo 2020 Olympics, anyone?

To players who comes in thinking that "im going to pay $$ so I can "play now" and join an alpha test game cause it'd be cool and all". Stop and re-evaluate what you're paying for.

(also lmao@ people thinking that an alpha test server runs 24/7, even disregard a giant note that states 'no test is running right now', hell they cant even download the game cause the DL links are off)

You're paying NOT to work for the game and become their 'tester'.

You're paying to join a community who get to see the game as it develops.
You're paying for cosmetics.
You're paying for "I got to be here before it got released on public"

any other altruistic bull crap you can think of such as "~I'm here cause i love the idea of the game~ and i totes looooveee to support what they're doing~" oh shut up, we all know that once something goes wrong in the game or it's development, you're going to be one of the first to turn your back on the game cause you based all of your decisions on your emotions.

You're risking your money for a game that may or may not see release. If you're going to back a project with the idea of ~cause feelings~ then prepare to be heartbroken cause everything changes, not just this game but many other games that you'll plan to 'back and support' in the future.

@Animalesco said in New Alpha Price & Founder Pack Sale:

From what I read here, I may have just purchased a game that I will never be able to see. Maybe I should have read this thread before buying it :I

what you need to understand about reading random comments is that a lot of those people are most likely borderline mentally disabled. Just read the contents of what they're saying and assess whether they have a credible basis for their 'gut feelings'.

I mean think about it, game goes on sale and suddenly it's cash grab?
People also say dumb things like "I haven't seen much quality in the production" when we haven't even left alpha stages yet.

I mean we legit only had 3? tests so far. The first one was a stress test, second one was a gameplay test, third one was to test out city mechanics, on their very very bare forms yet people are expecting this fully polished and ready to release game.

Like I said, always keep in mind that a vast majority of people, particularly on this game have stunningly low IQ that uses their 'gut feelings' to make a decision for em.

They can't even stay on topic for more than 2 sentences.

edit:

inb4: "waahh waaah waaahhhh you being mean isnt good for the community."

Well your low IQ isnt good for the community either, if you cant handle a tough pill to swallow, maybe you shouldnt be the one playing 'alpha stages' of a game.

See you all in October test. Cause let's be honest, y'all like to moan about something when we all know that you're going to come back and test it out anyway then all of your woes disappear, only to reappear 4 months later when you've already forgotten what you've invested your time and money for.

Hope you like long walks cause we got plenty of those.

Always carry at least 10 stone and 10 wood/sticks with you, keep an eye on your de-buffs.
Necrotic Disease (Constantly drops your red bar until you die) is a thing, you can just re-log if you catch it. There's a medical healing thing, forgot what it was called to fix it but a quick re-log normally cures you.

You can't really die in the game if you're prepared, gl. hf and see you on the next test.

@Blectorn said in New Alpha Price & Founder Pack Sale:

Hello fellow adventures,

Suppose I already have a package. Then it would be possible to increase to a better package by paying the difference. Is this difference also in the sale and can a promo code be used or is this only possible with the first purchase?

pretty sure you can still use promo codes + get the current available discount.

Your upgrade also applies retroactively, i.e; if you paid 60 and you want to upgrade for an 80, you only need to pay 20, then the discount + promo code, also applies which means you're going to pay less than 20.

@Jetah said in New Alpha Price & Founder Pack Sale:

I'm merely stating if there was a sale for those that already backed the game then it'd give an opportunity for those with lower packages to get a tier or few higher.

But if you have a lower tier and you're planning to buy a higher tier, then you'd get a discount for your next purchase already.

What you're asking for is to get a discount/rebate for what you've already purchased.