Space Engineers - Say goodbye to Starmade and Blockade runner. - Games

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44736740]It's not the same as waiting three years then paying $60 for a game, but the paid alpha business model is not without inherent issues.[/QUOTE] Sure those problems exist but they don't with space engineers. The devs are not looking to make a quick buck they are instead looking to make a game which competes with the quality of pc games much like star citizen. In other words they want their game to be really amazing.

Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.

[QUOTE=Civil;44736786]Sure those problems exist but they don't with space engineers. The devs are not looking to make a quick buck they are instead looking to make a game which competes with the quality of pc games much like star citizen. In other words they want their game to be really amazing.[/QUOTE] I will say it is certainly nowhere near as buggy or rarely-updated as Minecraft.

[QUOTE=billi999;44736799]Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.[/QUOTE] I disagree. You don't draw or paint like this, neither do you make games in that manner.

[QUOTE=dracotonisamond;44736363]a friend got me this game and i have to say its pretty enjoyable. we've been playing survival together and a running gag has developed that we are drowning in potato ships(rescue ships) because of how many times they die. however i never get one because i always respawn at the med bay on our station. so i had to fix my lack of a spudship. -imagesnip-[/QUOTE] Mother of god that interior is amazing, nice job

Every one is building neat little ships while I can only build ugly looking monsters [t]http://cloud-4.steampowered.com/ugc/487823204883249060/9D8BA4B62EB688ED19ABF2A24BDCFF00048F9085/[/t] Any way to stretch ships?

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44736740]The critical difference is, I've already paid all I'm ever going to pay for the game. Minecraft has shown that sometimes the "paid alpha" model results in the real bug-fixing ground work being ignored in favor of an intermittently scheduled series of gimmick updates as sales peter out and the funding dries up. It incentivizes developers to put out updates aimed at attracting more attention and sales in the short term, rather than fixing long-term problems. This just results in an "infinite alpha" situation where things like functionality, optimization, and stability never reach what people expect out of a completed game they paid for. It's not the same as waiting three years then paying $60 for a game, but the paid alpha business model is not without inherent issues.[/QUOTE]Agreed, but of all the alphas and betas I've bought myself into this suffers the least from that. The pace has not changed, and the developers have a pretty clear and unwavering vision of what they want. For almost every feature I thought it needed or should have they've eventually added, which gives me a lot of confidence in them. It's like the anti-Minecraft. [QUOTE=billi999;44736799]Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.[/QUOTE]A whole studio doesn't work on a single feature for each development cycle - that's dumb and doesn't work. Things have dependencies, people have different skills, and everything has different levels of priority. All of these features that they enable on a weekly basis have existed for months beforehand in various stages of development. They get "turned on" when they're ready enough to be played with by the public. Ready enough is not complete, ready enough means you don't have to include a footnote saying "Don't get into a large ship cockpit when you're a client of a multiplayer server or it'll cause a nullReference exception."

[QUOTE=billi999;44736799]Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.[/QUOTE] Software development wouldn't work very well that way. For one thing, different people do different things. Model builders start working on the next job while coders tweak the last thing. That's why we get turrets before we get working turrets. Or you get turrets that fire at a decoy before you get turrets that fire at an opposing faction. Second, you can never fully finish one feature before you finish them all. Features interact. So if you wait for all features to be polished before they're released, then you won't end up releasing the game until after at least the Alpha phase is complete. For instance, turrets are one feature, factions are another. Factions without working turrets isn't impressive. And turrets without factions is equally unimpressive. So if you wait until they're both finished, then you have a longer wait between updates, and more features needing tested at once, and more variables to test. It's better to figure out if the turrets do what they're supposed to do by testing whether they can be placed on a ship or station and fire at a designated target before working on the next feature which would designate more targets. But here's the thing, if you don't like software that is incomplete, [B]do not buy into an early-release alpha.[/B] Wait until the game is done and buy it then. You have no excuse for complaining about a game being not as complete as you like when you buy into an alpha, and nobody to blame but yourself. edit: Basically, what Squeegy said.

[QUOTE=billi999;44736799]Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.[/QUOTE] The point is to try ideas if they'll work before they fully decide on adding said features to the game and polishing them. If they polished every single last feature before being released then that would not only slow progress to a halt, it would also be a giant waste of time and energy if they find out that some of those features detract or do nothing for the overall game experience. It's best to try something and if it works, then polish it. If it doesn't, don't bother or throw it away. That's the purpose of an alpha, get it in your head.

Alphas is the phase for which the ground work for the game and its many features is slowly implemented to start being fleshed out at a later date. Setting in groundwork for future features that both relate or link into one another are better off with the basis blocks and foundations put in allows more lee-way for the rest of the code work to flesh them out in their entirety is more viable that dumping one entire feature in and fleshing it out then moving to the next.

[QUOTE=billi999;44736799]Right, so the point of alpha is to have the features all present but bare-bones, so that you can then move on to beta? If that is the case, I understand now. All I could say then is that I dislike that development model and would rather focus on implementing polished features one at a time.[/QUOTE] As a programmer, I must say I feel like this is the most efficient process, but then generally we wouldn't let clients use alpha versions of software either. Early Access is not misleading though, and Keen has been clear from the very beginning that the game will be buggy, unstable, and incomplete for some time. That is the nature of alpha. Generally speaking, "alpha" simply means the software is [B]not[/B] feature complete: it does not have all planned/intended features. What people are describing is that alpha is the best time for [I]prototyping[/I] aka dropping incomplete versions of features to test viability. This could be anything from UI mockups to actual functionality. If it feels good, it gets slated for more dev time, though that time is not always right now (and indeed is generally planned for beta). Refactoring and repairing code during alpha phase is kept to a minimum due to how likely it is to change anyway... no point sinking in extra effort smoothing out code that might get tossed or changed completely. It's generally discouraged to go too deep into your features until you feel you have the shape you're looking for. Think of it as drawing the lines before filling the insides with color and detail, or pouring a foundation before building a nice house on top of it. On this note, by buying into an early access game, you have willingly made yourself an alpha tester. Both Keen and Steam warn people of this before purchase. If you are unhappy with the process, you have no one to blame for that but yourself.

[video=youtube;83FRZl4GQ3Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83FRZl4GQ3Q[/video]

Said it before but I'm very happy this was my first Early Access purchase.

[QUOTE=FlakAttack;44737630]by buying into an early access game, you have willingly made yourself an alpha tester. Both Keen and Steam warn people of this before purchase. If you are unhappy with the process, you have no one to blame for that but yourself.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=kopd;44737127]But here's the thing, if you don't like software that is incomplete, [B]do not buy into an early-release alpha.[/B][/QUOTE] I'm aware of this and not some dissatisfied buyer that didn't know what they were getting into. I spent days weighing up whether to buy the Alpha or not after watching gameplay videos and seeing the features available when I bought it. I love Space Engineers and don't have a single regret from buying it. In fact, I even bought a friend a copy so that we could play multiplayer together. [QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;44737059] A whole studio doesn't work on a single feature for each development cycle - that's dumb and doesn't work. Things have dependencies, people have different skills, and everything has different levels of priority. All of these features that they enable on a weekly basis have existed for months beforehand in various stages of development. They get "turned on" when they're ready enough to be played with by the public. Ready enough is not complete, ready enough means you don't have to include a footnote saying "Don't get into a large ship cockpit when you're a client of a multiplayer server or it'll cause a nullReference exception."[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;44736846]I disagree. You don't draw or paint like this, neither do you make games in that manner.[/QUOTE] Right, when you put it like that it does sound stupid to work on one feature at time. I've only ever programmed in a small group or alone, so I never thought about it from that perspective. The approach I mentioned always worked for me but I guess that also depends on the scope of the project (that is, how many possibly interacting features there are). Interesting point on the enabling/disabling of features too. [QUOTE=ForgottenKane;44737193]The point is to try ideas if they'll work before they fully decide on adding said features to the game and polishing them. If they polished every single last feature before being released then that would not only slow progress to a halt, it would also be a giant waste of time and energy if they find out that some of those features detract or do nothing for the overall game experience. It's best to try something and if it works, then polish it. If it doesn't, don't bother or throw it away. That's the purpose of an alpha, get it in your head.[/QUOTE] That was exactly what I said at the start of that post, in short, but I think it wasn't clear from the way I worded it. What if we were talking about a big game development studio? In those cases you have to write about every little damn thing in a big ass game design document. If you deviate from it the publisher could kick your ass for going off the contract they funded. If you want to challenge that, you can take it to my games development lecturer who has 15 years industry experience. On the other hand, Keen is not a giant game dev studio or at least they don't answer to publishers, so your point still stands. And thanks to the lurking raters for the giant box citadel. After this discussion I don't think I'll post my horrific dumb opinions anymore.

[QUOTE=billi999;44737793]And thanks to the lurking raters for the giant box citadel. After this discussion I don't think I'll post my horrific dumb opinions anymore.[/QUOTE] If you get upset over icons, you're gonna have a bad time. Keep posting bra

[QUOTE=billi999;44737793]After this discussion I don't think I'll post my horrific dumb opinions anymore.[/QUOTE] Cool, now shut up.

[QUOTE=billi999;44737793]What if we were talking about a big game development studio? In those cases you have to write about every little damn thing in a big ass game design document. If you deviate from it the publisher could kick your ass for going off the contract they funded. If you want to challenge that, you can take it to my games development lecturer who has 15 years industry experience.[/QUOTE]It's naive to think a project can't be modified during development. Features get dropped, reworked and replaced all the time, because they NEED to be.

[QUOTE=Squeegy Mackoy;44738160]It's naive to think a project can't be modified during development. Features get dropped, reworked and replaced all the time, because they NEED to be.[/QUOTE] That's probably be true. I would guess the developers have to consult the publishers about any significant changes then? Edit: I meant games that do have publishers in general, not just Space Engineers.

[QUOTE=billi999;44738271]That's probably be true. I would guess the developers have to consult the publishers about any significant changes then?[/QUOTE] what publisher lmao

[QUOTE=billi999;44736035]Is not an excuse for half-implemented features. I'd rather have a small number of deep and complete features than a huge amount of unfinished features that don't interact or produce emergent behaviour.[/QUOTE] Actually, I'm pretty sure that's the entire point of an alpha... To implement a lot of features really quickly with no concern for quality, polish, or completeness. It's like the rough sketch you make before you paint a landscape.

[QUOTE=woolio1;44738361]Actually, I'm pretty sure that's the entire point of an alpha... To implement a lot of features really quickly with no concern for quality, polish, or completeness. It's like the rough sketch you make before you paint a landscape.[/QUOTE] It's also having several hundred thousand people stare at you from behind you, and every time you make a line, a few discontent people fling their shit while most nod their head silently and trust your judgment.

I hope this, whilst in alpha stage, stays as a proper alpha. No warframe shit where they're too afraid to change anything big because too many people have invested in it.

Honestly I think it could have been moved to beta once survival and mp were released, they were both pretty major pieces of what the game is now.

[QUOTE=The Jack;44738813]I hope this, whilst in alpha stage, stays as a proper alpha. No warframe shit where they're too afraid to change anything big because too many people have invested in it.[/QUOTE] Warframe's biggest issue was that they offered microtransactions IN THE BETA. You don't do that crap. You wait until you know exactly what you're doing with your weapons and boosts before you start charging people for them.

[QUOTE=Birdman101;44738847]Honestly I think it could have been moved to beta once survival and mp were released, they were both pretty major pieces of what the game is now.[/QUOTE] Well Alpha means that the game is in a stage where critical components and features are still being added while Beta is more the polishing and finish-up for release. So by those terms it fits right in alpha.

I know, I meant to say that just in comparison to most other games that use alpa/beta as an excuse to sell an unfinished game, if feels really well done so far.

okay you're still wrong

[QUOTE=NoDachi;44739123]okay you're still wrong[/QUOTE] it feels pretty nicely done to me bro

what does

-STOP- Where the heck are dedicated servers dammit, its like the next big ass thing. I really think that even with more and more new features, the game will never truly explode (Ha, the pun right? Right.) without some proper networking for multiplayer. I'd rather wait 5 weeks for dedicated servers than have frequent content updates. Sounds like blasphemy for some but being a player since day one its really biting into me now. [img]http://puu.sh/8BXYG.jpg[/img] Wat?