Deleted by @Squidgy
2 Likes
thank you for your totally unfriendly useless comment.
3 Likes
this execption is longer as 6 month now, and we have never weekly releases, a long time ago we had 2-3 weeks where they have add some new things but only 2-3 weeks.
I like the game really, but it was in the beginning a lot of promise which has still not been complied with. and after 1.5 years I expect just a bit more as this all. the release date of the game was e.g. moved already 2 or 3 times backwards
i have ~400 play hours, 350 hours i played before the c++ port, and ~50 direct after the c++ port. all new added feature since the port till now i have tested in just 2-3 hours.
i have payed a lot of money for this game and played a long time, I think that’s enough reason to say something and to expect something from a game that has promised much.
1 Like
No, the community is not with you because that’s exactly what you have to expect when you buy an early access title.
Sure, if the updates are for a finished game, then you are right. But not when the game isn’t even out of the alpha stage.
I’d say the cycle for an early access game should be as follows: Release → Players break stuff/discover bugs/dislike features → devs fix all the new issues → Release (repeat that until the game works.)
If you delay the releases of new features to fix every little bug you basically delay this process which in turn delays the release of the finished game.
(Note: That doesn’t mean they should release stuff which has glaring bugs that could be fixed in an hour or so.)
2 Likes
There’s a big difference between us and most EA games which I think people are often overlooking when complaining about releases (i’m not saying we can’t do things better).
We’re a multiplayer only, MMO game with a small number of servers running for the EA, that means we ‘cannot’ release possibly unstable features that could crash servers or else as soon as someone crashes the game, it’s crashed for ‘everyone’ and no-one can play at all…
If we were making a single player game, it’d be much, much easier to just release features that are even partially developed and unstable, because hey, it’s just your game that will crash, so if you’re messing around it’s not a problem. We can’t do that (or we could, but it’d be really expensive, as we’d need many more servers running different versions of the game for different versions of clients to connect to, rather than just the current stable/testing)
7 Likes
This is NOT ■■■■■ ing as you said so charming (and neither is @Saint_X) . We are all grown up adults (at least i hope this) and as you can see, other devs doing EA different (some would say “better”). This is not an offence against anyone - as i said some times before (in other posts) - this is an attempt to make things “better”.
Did you ever asked why there are only few players ? EA is not the correct answer - a lot of other games are EA too and have a LOT of players / buyers (e.g. Factorio (500k +), The Universim (23k+) and B< has only 10k.
Did you ever asked why B< has only “Mixed” steam reviews ? Read some of the Reviews and you’ll see most of the people missing content and updates.
I’m part of the community since a long time now (late '14) and a lot of things changed in this time (not only in good ways). You can read my complete statement with a detailed description of my main concerns HERE and HERE. But to name only a few:
- No more dev survey (they have been one of my main reasons to buy this game as EA)
- A lot of things change without any announcement (this is a bit better in the last time, but not much)
- Only few information about key gameplay aspects
And yes, i’m totally willing to play a game that crashes every 20 mins. This is (as @KuroKuma said) what EA is all about. Test, Feedback, Fix, Test again.
@lucadeltodecso: This is right, but wouldn’t it be possible to have e.g. at least a few servers (6-12) to host different versions (at the moment, there are only 2 servers up and running. In the past there have been a LOT more servers with no one playing on them. What has changed ? ) ? You could set up a Cron-Job to restart the server every time it crashes and store the server logs or am i wrong ? (Yes, i know you might not get the Client-Side error log but you have at least the last server-client-interaction)
3 Likes
all 3 games has a small dev team
thats what we said sice a long time, a early access game is for testing ánd finding bugs, and it is for helping the devs to decide ehat is a good feature or not.
it is useless if a dev spend 200h on a feature what the community dislike.
me too, if i get some new content i have no problem with it if the game sometimes crash. this time i spend for testing is time what the devs can use for fixe a other bug or adding more feature.
what is better 3 dev for testing or over 100 player with diffrent systems ?
i thing we need only 2-3 server:
- 1 Stable server, with no buiggy feature
- 1-2 experimental server with all feature for testing.
i know that we have at the start over 20 server, therefor it should no problem to host 3 server.
1 Like
i’m sure that all the features are/have shown or discussed in here at forums before they release it so there’s no way for them to do features what people dislike. anything they release is already kind of accomplished by us. is the feature good when we personally test it is a different case. this is the reason why im wondering why u feel this “no detailed info before update” so negatively? i’m sure there will be detailed info when the update comes like every game does (patch notes)
Hi @Saint_X
It is a difficult balance. On the one hand we have a very passionate and dedicated community who want to try new mechanics out as soon as possible, no matter what state they are in. And on the other we have the players who check up on the game and play it every few weeks or months. If we update the game too often with game breaking updates a lot of players from the second group might be driven away from the game and we risk missing out from their feedback. Feedback from both groups is important to any early access title as the second group of players will not be up to date with the game’s progress or how the new mechanics work when compared to players who follow the forums.
I am still relatively knew to the Wonderstruck team and this is the team’s first early access title. The process is certainly far from perfect but we are learning and hope we can improve things.
I would like to add that a lot of the individual mechanics being worked on are linked so it made sense to release them together so they are reviewed as a group and so players can see how different systems crossover.
Oh, by the way I am happy to chat anytime. So please send me an @ if you want.
first thx @luke-turbulenz for the answer
but on the other way you lose a lot of people from the other side if you wait to long for updates^^ atm the balance is too much for the player where want big updates. As example we see so many units as artwork but we have only 2 ingame, as example you can add some from the other units as example the smasher unit. since a long time i wait for this unit. i think it is not so much work to add the unit to the game. and it is a good midway between both sides
hey @luke-turbulenz,
at this point I might be on side of @Saint_X. You spoke about balance to carry “weekly / monthly” players and “the real followers”. Don’t you think the value of comments of those who keep on track all the time (instead of the feedback of those who join monthly) is much higher? Those people identify themselfves much stronger with the game. Those people are much more ambitious to contribute feedback. They develope proposals partwise, that even you dev’s didn’t think about before it was posted in the forum…
You might consider a change in thinking about it. I don’t think weekly / monthly checkers can contribute by far as much as the “active” community. I see your concern, but out of the current point of view and like @Heurazio proved on steam feedbacks, you lose the active part of players because of too less content in too long time.
Even in unstable ways it is good to discover new. Additionally I think the feedback of active players is far more valuable.
Till the next big patch (because it’s a big feature wrap up) active people might stay with you. But if afterwards content releases again take that long, you might lose strong feedback givers. Furthermore the amount of posts on steam and other forums with complaints of too less new content will increase. That could be too negative publicity…
I really hope you don’t experience that since I really like the game and want it to be as big and successful as possible. But this can just be reached if the public image contains more dynamic, more advertisement, i guess.
I already thought of supporting a team in creating a fan website for boundless. I think things like that really create good publicity, because gamers are so amazed by the game, they want to go further - support it and scream it out into the world, how nice it is. But this is not working, if you can just write about dev posts. If you want to catch interest, you need screenshots, videos, statements of own gaming experience. So that’s why noone really was motivated to really start it yet…
So far…
PS: I read this unqualified comment from @UmbraVictus about Blizzard Games. I really wonder what games and studios he considers to create far less buggy / unbalanced games then the Snowstorm Studios. I play their games since warcraft 2 and have to say, all of their games were @ release faaaaar ahead of other publishers. Of course balancing in Online titles always is an issue, especially after releasing updates with new content. But where is that not the case? The perfectionism, the artwork, the community interaction of Blizzard made me and Millions of others their fans. Considering them as a good example for bad releases makes me realize how far away from a realistic world he lives 
Wonder what his original post was, that was deleted by @Squidgy . Sorry for mentioning that in this detail, but I felt hurt in a way 
2 Likes
Hi @Smoothy
I’m not sure the term real followers is correct. Either way the players who don’t post in forums are giving us feedback in other ways. But please do not get me wrong, the feedback from the forums is vital and shows us if we are on the right track.We should look at ways we can improve it to keep everyone happy.
It is interesting because this topic is now shifting from new features to more content. As a developer they are two different things. But in order to get more content you need the system in place and that’s what we are working on at the moment.
What would you call the fan site if you got it going? 
1 Like
@luke-turbulenz, yeah, “real followers” might not be the right therm. I was already doubting the therm when I wrote it, but in the short time, i could not replace it in a better way (guess cause of lack in vocabularies, since english is not my mother tongue). I mean the people who track the developement day by day (like me, if I have the time). I think we refine more (in quality and quantity) of the input you give us, so I guess we can contribute better feedback with higher value.
People who check the game rarely might not even know all those discussed topics in the forum. We already had giant discussions and know the decisions. So the “long time followers” at least won’t repeat asking / suggesting things already debated.
I can’t say there is such a hard shift. I think in this topic both is requested. People like to see new features ingame to test them. But the last month there were a few big updates that really gave testing playground. Just the features to test were “shallowly” analyzed in a few hours and later extensively discussed in the forum. So of course they also demand more. Especially because so many neat features are mentioned the last weeks. You devs test them all the time and give us feedback and we players cannot lay our hands on. I guess that is frustrating for some. On the other hand many can imagine that you get even more feedback, if you release those features to public. And that feedback you can implement already within next udate steps.
Ummm, name is not fix. I have many ideas, but in the end it’s decision of the team who will run it. I could tell you in pm - too many eyes could steal the good ones just kidding, if you are interested I can write you pm, but there is nothing decided yet. Also it seems a bit like people who wanted to start it, lose there motivation to do it…
2 Likes
there’s another consideration other than crash-stability of the game/servers, often as a feature is being developed the ‘data’ required and it’s layout change, and we rely on… basicly being able to wipe our local dev worlds constantly a lot of the time to deal with the data changes wtihout wasting a load of time on migrations. But if we pushed a release with an unstable (data-wise) version of a feature, we’d then have to waste time on migrations when it changes, or equally waste time (it does take time.) to wipe the worlds even more frequently.
4 Likes
thx @Squidgy
But you safe the time for testing / bug finding and you lost not so much commuity.
I think it should not be to hard to add at least every month a small update.
at th moment i have no motivation to spend again 300 hours for a big building or to make a fane page like we planned a long time ago.
last time i showed in the steam reviews boundless had a positiv statistic, now only balanced.
1 Like
So since there is now a dedicated topic about the state in which new features should be released I want to come back to the devlogs.
I see that you are about to release quite a bunch of new features, so I’m curious, and want to ask, when we’ll be able to read/see more about them (cause, you know, someone has to provide us with new leaks, now that @ben is gone 
)
Also a big shout out to you for being this active in the forum on a Sunday!
3 Likes
How does that differ from the stable & experimental servers we have now?
3 Likes
The feature is that everyone gets a kitten.
7 Likes
can it be that you do not want to understand us?
or did you only read the half of all post ?
i mean a experimental server with new feature for testing.
but I’m too tired to do a better explain sorry