I'm just saying that it shouldn't have been surprising that so many people got the wrong idea from that trailer. I knew what it was when I bought it, because I had read about it in Game Informer long before that E3.
#We happy few update version 1.02 plus
Manywhelps: To be fair, our E3 2016 video wasn't the debut trailer - we'd been openly talking about the game for over a year, had two trailers beforehand, plus a Kickstarter campaign, a hands on demo at both PAX 2015 and PAX 2016, and a pre-alpha version available in Kickstarter backer and media/Youtuber hands in 2015. Made me look forward to a proper Linux version, and the final product.
It was my first time actually playing it. Everything worked fine, but it wasn't exactly performant, and while my laptop isn't a gaming powerhouse, it isn't entry level either (i7 - GTX765M - 8GB RAM). I broke my own rules, and fired up the Life in Technicolour update using WINE. Obviously, $330k doesn't pay a team of 12-40 (started around 12, grew to around 40) for very long, and yet there doesn't seem to be any "we're running of cash" urgency (unless you listen to the consipiracy theorists that figure this whole price increase thing was a stunt to sell more games at $30). Your over a year passed that date, and have now set a release date for April 2018.
Your KS campaign loosly stated June 2016 for release. So, out of curiosity, if Gearbox isn't funding development, who is? The KS campaign netted ~$330k. Gearbox is helping in other ways (and in good ways too - this is far from the typical predatory publishing situation). In this case, Gearbox isn't funding development, we have separate funding for that. He's not really the devil you think, but still I can understand how that might be frustrating. I'm happy to talk about that being a difficult move to make, but let's not forget about the year of publicity before hand.Įdit: Also, thank you for playing! I'm sorry you have strong feelings for Randy and that we've made it so that you're supporting him indirectly. So I do understand that for very many people, that was their first experience of the game. It is very hard to compete with Microsoft announcements. To be fair, our E3 2016 video wasn't the debut trailer - we'd been openly talking about the game for over a year, had two trailers beforehand, plus a Kickstarter campaign, a hands on demo at both PAX 2015 and PAX 2016, and a pre-alpha version available in Kickstarter backer and media/Youtuber hands in 2015. Randy Pitchford is the epitome of game development scum.
If you want to voice your opinion that's fine, but you should expect a response in kind.įilthyAssistant: Yeah, I wonder why people were taken aback when the debut trailer was entirely focused on story and had no indication of survival elements.Īlso I did buy this as soon as it was available on Steam, and actually did enjoy it despite usually not liking survival games, but involvement with Gearbox makes me wish I could refund it. I think Manywhelps did a commendable job in keeping civil up to now and if anyone thinks that they can say what they want without being called out on that just because the other person happens to be a developer representative, that's just plain disrespectful to another human being. No one has to like those decisions, but the posts from some users in here are getting more hostile every post. I've been reading this thread daily and all I see is a developer representative who's trying to explain their decisions. If they believe the developer is unprofessional/untrustworthy/incompetent etc and the game is a rip-off then why not move on? If they don't believe anything the developer says then why even ask anything? Or is it because they don't want answers but want to make baseless accusations instead? Being a potential customer (as if they were really going to buy depending on how the discussion went) doesn't mean you can talk insulting nonsense then complain about being told you're talking insulting nonsense. Amcdermo: I don't know why they keep coming back and being so contrary both on here and Steam.