This thread quickly devolved into dog-piling to coerce the developers with a "popularity" vote into discarding their design decisions.
Little more than elaborate, passive aggressive bullying.
Exactly. I for one am glad to be a part of the camp who want the game the Devs want to make.
Exactly so! At the end of the day this game is their vision not ours! And as I stated above they have to be doing this for a reason we may not know what that reason is as of yet but I personally have faith in them!
IDK how many times now I've seen people jumping down their throats for adding in a new mechanic or changing something here and there, just to back down later on when it's been fully fleshed out and implemented.
This has JUST came out of the oven guys. Give it time to cool down before you bite into it and spit it out..
I personally think that certain parts of this community want WAY more control over the game than a community should have. We're not the ones making the game, we don't get to make these decisions.
So I finally created a forums account here to chime in on this, the latest in a seemingly sudden rush of implementing awkward hoops to appease people who think QoL in a game where we are a high tech space man rather than a cave man with a stone pickaxe is some kind of crime.
Wow. Really? Realism is not the same as tedium. And selective cherry picking of "Realism" and abandoning the concept if it would make gameplay more convenient instead of less is also rampant.
Plenty of "realism" we are not allowed to have when it would be convenient instead. Like the in game data files talking about getting lots of stalker teeth either either by way of knife fighting sharks, or directly taking them from alien containment. Even the developers have admitted that is "Misleading" off on the Steam forums.
Realistic, practical... And not implemented except as flavor text. Where is our realism there, when it would IMPROVE our survival and lives, rather than just add more padding and hurdles because "something something realism?" and a light shrug, while leaving so many beneficial realistic options out in the cold.
If anything all these crafting timers BREAK immersion. Because all that time spent waiting on a timer, even if you try to busy yourself with other things, just serves to remind you that you are playing a video game that's only slowing you down for it's own sake.
That's not "Impatience". That's forcing yourself to sit on your hands just to get back to actually playing the game properly instead of sorting your batteries and claiming you are making "efficient use of your time". Punishing yourselves and acting like that means you love the game more than anyone else, is not a healthy way to design gameplay.
Calling feedback to such a drastic, and unneeded design change "jumping down the dev's throat" is a rather disappointing viewpoint to hear from what should be a healthy playerbase.
"Give the devs feedback about the game so it can be completed sooner!... Unless we don't agree, then you're just being a cyber bully!"
This game may have many impressive aspects, but the "Crafting" end is not one of them. As well, this game is hardly robust enough on the crafting front to even deserve such timers. With the coming removal of terraforming, there will be even less emphasis on crafting and base building than before.
We have one type of basic room that isn't a tube corridor, and even that is intended to be gated. Because there is nothing else interesting TO gate, but even the most bare bones of generic furnishings.
We have to scan even something as basic as office chairs to unlock them. Having to gate IKEA furniture as hard as you gate a nuclear reactor is quite telling.
I wasn't saying exploration doesn't make sense, I was saying the argument that this is good because exploration is good doesn't make any sense. Please, you can't be this stupid, so don't act that way.
Really good way to make your point, complaining about "thinly veiled insults" then hypocritically using them in your next post. You remind me of myself when I was about 15.
it comes down to a choice between "Here's everything, immediately, you have access but you'll probably get bored quickly and play for about 5 hours all together."
or...
"This is a game you will have to put a lot of time into, gathering resources, finding fragments, waiting for things to be built, and if you like that kind of thing you'll play for 30+ hours multiple times."
This is the worst nonsense of all. No one is arguing for instant access to everything - they are arguing that we shouldn't need to waste our time doing nothing when we could be doing something. And "waiting for things" is very much a standout "unfun" activity that almost everyone agrees is unfun, unlike you know everything else on your list.
Firstly, I was speaking of both extremes, obviously, and stated in the same post the devs have to find balance, the happy medium. I could almost say Please, you can't be this stupid, so don't act that way. But ad hominems are high school level stuff.
Secondly, plenty of people have argued for instant access to everything, but fortunately most people realise that would mean players getting bored too quickly. This is the opposite extreme of waiting a long, long time. Something which plenty of people have also argued in favour of. It comes down to personal preference.
Why don't you actually try to explain what this is supposed to add to the game - how exactly wait timers would make the average player spend more time exploring instead of less? Since right now you're certainly stating it, but you've done nada to actually explain how that could even conceivably work.
Sorry, you're right, I didn't explain this incredibly obvious concept.
People aren't expected to wait exactly 90 seconds while a 90 second craft timer ticks. Neither are they expected to go and swim around for exactly 90 seconds and come back.
You're probably (I'm not privy to the devs thoughts but this is what I suppose) meant to think "This won't be ready for 90 seconds, maybe I'll just come back later for it. Should I make another fabricator so I can have two things going at once? I'll need more resources then, better get out there."
Ahahah, disliking a "feature" that exists solely to waste the time of players is bullying now? Wowee.
Yes, the developers are so insanely stupid they set out to create a feature with the sole intent to deliberately sabotage their project by wasting their supporter's time.
Please, you can't be this stupid, so don't act that way.
Wow it's incredible how many butt-hurt newcomers have appeared due to this issue.
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid. I want to play the game, not be forced to wait 4 minutes for something. Maybe add in a 4 minute cool down after it is done building, but don't make me stand there waiting. People are saying to go do something else but what should I do? If the next thing I need to do involves the object I'm crafting, what else can I do while waiting?
You don't have to wait for some fabricator to get done with the item you want built. Simply go out and do something else. My example in Warframe again. I have a Warframe cooking in the foundry, but I don't just sit there for the entire three days waiting for it. I go out and go on missions to find materials for whatever weapon I want to build for it. Or gather the credits I'll need to pay for it. Heck... I just get multiple projects going at a time (such as all of a weapon's/warframe's components) so the wait is shorter.
In Subnautica once something is cooking I'll go somewhere else. Maybe catch fish and collect salt to fill my food locker. Or find more quartz (I always seem to be needing those). Or go play chicken with a Reaper Leviathan.
Yes. The Devs are trying to find that balance between players who want realistsic build times and players who want instant gratification. And I support whatever direction they choose. After all, they're the ones making it.
People are saying to go do something else but what should I do? If the next thing I need to do involves the object I'm crafting, what else can I do while waiting?
Why don't you actually try to explain what this is supposed to add to the game - how exactly wait timers would make the average player spend more time exploring instead of less? Since right now you're certainly stating it, but you've done nada to actually explain how that could even conceivably work.
Sorry, you're right, I didn't explain this incredibly obvious concept.
People aren't expected to wait exactly 90 seconds while a 90 second craft timer ticks. Neither are they expected to go and swim around for exactly 90 seconds and come back.
You're probably (I'm not privy to the devs thoughts but this is what I suppose) meant to think "This won't be ready for 90 seconds, maybe I'll just come back later for it. Should I make another fabricator so I can have two things going at once? I'll need more resources then, better get out there."
You still haven't explained what this adds to the game (because you can't [because it doesn't add anything to the game {it is a bad idea}]).
Wow it's incredible how many butt-hurt newcomers have appeared due to this issue.
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid. I want to play the game, not be forced to wait 4 minutes for something. Maybe add in a 4 minute cool down after it is done building, but don't make me stand there waiting. People are saying to go do something else but what should I do? If the next thing I need to do involves the object I'm crafting, what else can I do while waiting?
Something else. Go get more resources so you have them for later. Catch fish. Look at the game because its beautiful. Try to get some good shots for your picture frames.
Wow it's incredible how many butt-hurt newcomers have appeared due to this issue.
Ok, I've been here longer than you
Don't you even start that. He may not have put that the best way but it doesn't mean you have to make it worse. There's a distinct possibility some people may have been newcomers, and there's also the possibility that they just made accounts to post after being lurkers.
Im one of those that are undecided as to how this ''feature'' fits into the game. On one hand i do agree that this really feels like it has been implemented to artificially lengthen gameplay needlessly. It takes over 3 minutes to build a seaglide but less than 30 seconds to build a whole friggin cyclops?
On another hand its kind of logical that a Seaglide would take longer to create than the simple copper wire its made of ... but 3 minutes? .... hmmm not too sure about this. Im not against such a feature but i will say that they do need to revise the crafting times of some of the items cuz its currently a bit wonky.
there is one case where a longer crafting time is good: when first building my Cyclops in stable I noticed that it took significantly longer than other things, and this contributed to the sense of "epic accomplishment" (the satisfying splash at the end also helps).
Having said that, I am not suggesting increasing the crafting time of the Cyclops. It could perhaps stand to be lengthened by about ten seconds, but any more than this would just be annoying. And it's important that the other tools you've crafted prior to this should take less time to craft, which appears to no longer be the case.
In my opinion anything over a minute is alot. I'd make the Cyclops maybe a minute, tops, cuz its so freakin' huge anyone would agree that it would take time to make that. But 3 minutes for a Seaglide .... it takes 3 seconds to make the copper wire, 3 more seconds to make a battery and another 3 for a lubricant, thats 9 seconds total but 3 minutes to combine all those into a propeller .... see my point? needs tweaking if you ask me
You still haven't explained what this adds to the game (because you can't [because it doesn't add anything to the game {it is a bad idea}]).
You literally just quoted what it adds to the game.
How are you not getting this?
It adds a sense of needing to plan ahead.
It adds a new level of resource management. (The more the timer is increased, the more this is actually true.)
It adds a little more realism to a completely unrealistic concept that many, many people have complained about. (Of course it does, it just does.)
Whether you think it's a good idea or a bad idea, it's your own personal preference.
This idea was implemented in an attempt to give people what they've been asking for, for months, because the fabricator instantly creating things from thin air has always been something most people can't quite suspend their disbelief enough to agree with.
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid.
Correct. You've been here longer than me.
And you've made 5 posts.
This change you hate so much was made in response to what people have requested. Perhaps if you'd been more active on the forums, and submitted bug reports, and given praise to the devs for what you enjoy, they would have realised that people like it being instant.
Instead all they've heard is how people don't like the fabricator system. So they changed it.
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid.
Correct. You've been here longer than me.
And you've made 5 posts.
This change you hate so much was made in response to what people have requested. Perhaps if you'd been more active on the forums, and submitted bug reports, and given praise to the devs for what you enjoy, they would have realised that people like it being instant.
Instead all they've heard is how people don't like the fabricator system. So they changed it.
And now no doubt they'll change it back.
Then it should be all the more telling when on this subject, people with an interest in the game have decided "That's it. This is worth finally posting(on the official forums)/Creating a (official) forums account over".
Rather than simply hoping it sorts itself out while remaining silent, or commenting on other channels the Devs may not watch, or respond to, as frequently.
Hopefully we get more than "It's not literally 6 minutes" on that front, though. When the first thing a Developer says on a subject is a quick drive by minutiae correction... That's not encouraging.
I do expect them to be better than most devs teams however. So we will probably see more than boilerplate assurances they listen to feedback and work very hard. They will likely be willing to admit there is even so much as a CHANCE they went overboard, instead of waving it off as "Well, OTHER people like it and we already worked on it, sorry you don't agree" like a lot of dev teams do, like Killing Floor 2 when they added resistances to trash enemies and covering their ears as their recent reviews tanked into the pavement.
Wow it's incredible how many butt-hurt newcomers have appeared due to this issue.
...is exceptionally toxic in a community.
You know what, you're right. I extend my apologies for that foolish comment. I was frustrated to see so many new names complaining about something which was, to me and my like, a good attempt by the devs to give us what we've wanted.
Now, I have to assume the game is in early access so players can see the game and give feedback on it. Don't you think the philosophy of "the devs can do no wrong" is the wrong direction to go here? Even if that's true, then there's nothing our dissenting opinion can do to change their vision, right? If it's false, then you're just not being helpful in the Early Access process.
Yes, exactly. That's what's so frustrating. It seems a lot of people only want to "help" when they disagree with something. How were the devs supposed to know so many people liked the fabricator's speed when nobody bothered to tell them?
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid.
Correct. You've been here longer than me.
And you've made 5 posts.
This change you hate so much was made in response to what people have requested. Perhaps if you'd been more active on the forums, and submitted bug reports, and given praise to the devs for what you enjoy, they would have realised that people like it being instant.
Instead all they've heard is how people don't like the fabricator system. So they changed it.
And now no doubt they'll change it back.
Hopefully we get more than "It's not literally 6 minutes" on that front, though.
I keep saying this but, why doesn't everyone just take a gigantic step backwards here guys. Give the devs time to..
A) explain why they are making these changes (even tho they don't owe us one)
Wait until it's OUT of experimental and fully implemented and fleshed out then put into the full game (even then it still could change)
C) Realise that it is in fact EXPERIMENTAL and everything may be changed at ANYTIME!
Or if any of these things don't float your boat.. Find a better way of approaching this subject with the devs.. throwing insults around RARELY gets you the outcome you wanted to achieve..
even though I just think its an unneeded bump in the road, the devs should stay true to their vision of course in all things related to the game,
that and just dont touch the bobthebuilder code so it's all irrelevant discussion anyway
The whole point of Experimental is so that devs can try experimental things and get feedback on them from testers. They tried a thing, they're getting the feedback. "Wait until it goes into Stable" is self-defeating.
It's evident that at least of the people who choose to post in this thread, more people are unhappy with the change than are happy with it. But it's up to the devs to decide whether it's still working as intended or if they should make further tweaks to it or reverse the change entirely. Nobody is trying to force anyone (or shouldn't be, at least), and throwing insults around in either direction doesn't help anything.
But yes, I think most of what needs to be said has already been said, on both sides. There's not much point in talking about it further until we either hear from the devs or get another update that affects things.
I keep saying this but, why doesn't everyone just take a gigantic step backwards here guys. Give the devs time to..
A) explain why they are making these changes (even tho they don't owe us one)
Wait until it's OUT of experimental and fully implemented and fleshed out then put into the full game (even then it still could change)
C) Realise that it is in fact EXPERIMENTAL and everything may be changed at ANYTIME!
Or if any of these things don't float your boat.. Find a better way of approaching this subject with the devs.. throwing insults around RARELY gets you the outcome you wanted to achieve..
Part of why I brought up Killing Floor 2, is one of the most controversial changes they made recently-
A: Went to a beta, and they assured people they would not just shove it out to live.
B: Put it in live 2 days later anyways.
C: Left for E3, told people they didn't have the manpower to remove it.
D; Tweak resistances instead of removing them. Make passive aggressive patch notes about how hard they worked on it, and how "We thought people would like it!". Say how sorry they are about it without actually removing it.
Later, call it "Essentially removed" when called on it, even though trash filler enemies still tank multiple headshots they cold not before (Previously, head health on trash enemies was not only static across difficulties, but basically a guaranteed kill to reward accuracy over mindlessly spamming your weaponry into their torsos. Even to enemies who essentially died to two hits to the leg anyways).
Why this example?: When it comes to early access, it is becoming quickly apparent that "Giving it time to sort out first", even in a beta or experimental branch... Is not enough, you need to jump on that ASAP. Because the longer you let it sit, the more odds even an unpopular change that will turn 90% of the next five pages of Steam reviews negative, will get lost cost fallacy mindsets given for keeping it.
Saying "It's okay, it's only an experimental/just implemented! Don't say you don't like it yet!" is naive optimism at best. or calculated attempts to delay any discontent long enough for the Devs to consider it too much of a waste of their efforts to change their mind, at worst.
Even games where you are a thawed out cryogenically frozen WW2 soldier, teamed up with a club DJ and senior citizen priest. Using a microwave gun built by an airdropped 3D printer, to fight a 100 year old cyborg nazi... You still get the "But REALISM!" crowd talking up game design changes they personally prefer, and then throw realism in the trash when it would make the game more convenient to play instead of less. (Such as asking "If realism is so important, how about letting a giant pile of C4 deal full damage instead of capping itself at maybe 2 C4 worth" getting told realism is now unimportant, since it does not suit their preference).
And who knows.. maybe this is all a master plan leading to something bigger!
Maybe through possible base upgrades the fabricator will increase its times.. maybe they are finally adding that command room that will give us more control over our sea bases??
All of this is probably speculation and wishful thinking.. but I'm choosing to believe they have a bigger picture in mind before I start out right saying that this is a bad idea BEFORE it's fully implemented.
@LaserFace realism didn't factor into what I was saying.. this just hit experimental.. they constantly update and add things as that part is complete.. what I'm hoping we are seeing is just a part in a much bigger grand plan..
Who knows maybe this could just be tied to the power source in the end... solar panels and bio reactors equal longer fab times.. thermal and nuclear equal fastest fab times..
Again possibly talking from a point of pure speculation. But I really want to see where they are taking this.
@LaserFace realism didn't factor into what I was saying.. this just hit experimental.. they constantly update and add things as that part is complete.. what I'm hoping we are seeing is just a part in a much bigger grand plan..
Who knows maybe this could just be tied to the power source in the end... solar panels and bio reactors equal longer fab times.. thermal and nuclear equal fastest fab times..
Again possibly talking from a point of pure speculation. But I really want to see where they are taking this.
You may not be playing the "But realism!" card, but it is a popular card to play. Even in this very thread.
That and realism or not, still does not change the primary point of that post. That "You don't deserve to say anything because it's too soon to be allowed a negative opinion!" is bad news for healthy game development. With examples of such to boot.
Whether said well meaningly with some optimistic hope of some invisible and unspoken end result where it will suddenly make sense. Or said to try and stifle differing opinions until it's too late in the dev cycle to change.
Why don't you actually try to explain what this is supposed to add to the game - how exactly wait timers would make the average player spend more time exploring instead of less? Since right now you're certainly stating it, but you've done nada to actually explain how that could even conceivably work.
Sorry, you're right, I didn't explain this incredibly obvious concept.
People aren't expected to wait exactly 90 seconds while a 90 second craft timer ticks. Neither are they expected to go and swim around for exactly 90 seconds and come back.
You're probably (I'm not privy to the devs thoughts but this is what I suppose) meant to think "This won't be ready for 90 seconds, maybe I'll just come back later for it. Should I make another fabricator so I can have two things going at once? I'll need more resources then, better get out there."
So best case scenario in your example, whether I get my item or I don't get my item, the result is me going back out exploring. That part doesn't change. There's no net increase in exploration. In fact, your explanation actually points to a net decrease - because now I'm spending time building additional fabbers and power for them, working on base building, rather than exploring.
Worse, even that doesn't hold together, because now I'm only going to (taking your advice) craft at most one item per return to base. Which means that if I want stuff, especially complex stuff, I'm still going to have to return to base more often, and time spent returning to base is generally time not spent exploring.
You would think if it was so "incredibly obvious" you'd manage to explain it without actively refuting your own point.
I keep saying this but, why doesn't everyone just take a gigantic step backwards here guys. Give the devs time to..
A) explain why they are making these changes (even tho they don't owe us one)
Wait until it's OUT of experimental and fully implemented and fleshed out then put into the full game (even then it still could change)
C) Realise that it is in fact EXPERIMENTAL and everything may be changed at ANYTIME!
Or if any of these things don't float your boat.. Find a better way of approaching this subject with the devs.. throwing insults around RARELY gets you the outcome you wanted to achieve..
Despite how it might seem, I'm actually fine with the devs for trying out a change in experimental. I mostly trust the devs to make good decisions, but I think it's important they get feedback about those decisions and how players are responding to them and enjoying them while it's still in experimental and easy to change. I think this change is, right now, a minor annoyance that serves no purpose other than making the game less fun - I don't want it to become a serious one by the time it gets mainlined because of people like those in this thread spewing nonsense, and it's not an attitude I want to see them adopting going forward thinking it's what all their fans want.
Worse, even that doesn't hold together, because now I'm only going to (taking your advice) craft at most one item per return to base. Which means that if I want stuff, especially complex stuff, I'm still going to have to return to base more often, and time spent returning to base is generally time not spent exploring.
You seem to be conveniently ignoring the whole "should I spend these valuable resources on another fabricator?" thing.
Encouraging careful planning ahead and resource management isn't so bad.
By the way I don't think this was done to encourage exploration, I don't know where you get that idea. Was it because I stated how the devs want this to be a primarily exploration game? Because that's a side issue. I personally believe this decision to add a timer to fabrication is a direct response to the dozens upon dozens of complaints about an instant 3D printer being too much suspense of disbelief to get behind. That's how simple this is.
I think this change is, right now, a minor annoyance that serves no purpose other than making the game less fun - I don't want it to become a serious one by the time it gets mainlined because of people like those in this thread spewing nonsense, and it's not an attitude I want to see them adopting going forward thinking it's what all their fans want.
This point is extremely valid. It's just incredibly sad that it takes this to make people speak up.
Again, this conversation might never have happened if the devs knew people were okay with the fabs working as they were previously.
What happened to the belief of an inherent obligation of a supporter of an early access games to actually help with development on a regular basis, instead of just when something they actively don't like appears?
It adds a sense of needing to plan ahead.
It adds a new level of resource management. (The more the timer is increased, the more this is actually true.)
It adds a little more realism to a completely unrealistic concept that many, many people have complained about. (Of course it does, it just does.)
Whether you think it's a good idea or a bad idea, it's your own personal preference.
This idea was implemented in an attempt to give people what they've been asking for, for months, because the fabricator instantly creating things from thin air has always been something most people can't quite suspend their disbelief enough to agree with.
Oh boy now I have to plan what order I'm fabricating things rather than a simple 'I need to make this' checklist! It's a wrinkle in the already satisfying 'I want this -> gotta go to a place to scan stuff/get materials for it -> what the heck is making that deep reverberating noi- oh hey these spade whales are pretty neat!' gameplay loop going on.
A level of resource management that is again, just a wrinkle on a pretty efficient system already in place. The biggest hurdle (the constructor) is particularly telling on this point: if I'm building it, that means I want to build a base, which means I already have a place picked out and enough materials to get started on building it. With this change, I now have to wait four minutes to get started, Or rather, now I push my constructor fabrication up by four minutes before doing my usual thing of 'gathering more titanium & quartz 'cause you can never have enough.'
At that stage of the game I now have an additional worry of my sole fabricator being taken up by crafting when I might need it to quickly make some cooked food and water to not die of starvation/dehydration because four minutes is both a surprisingly long time and not long enough to trigger my 'I'm gonna need to prep for this' reaction. It is a worry I would prefer to be without.
Finally, realism for the sake of realism doesn't work. Full stop. Especially in a game that already has a very good balance of realism (swimming and oceanic ecology) and non-realism (the super-technology level that allows the existence of Dark Matter reactors in the first place.)
People all have different tolerances for their sense of disbelief. Much like people all have different complaints and will argue over them. It is ok to not like a thing in a good game.
Example: the limited lethal options available to players to deal with the environment. This is pretty unrealistic and is a legitimate complaint to have about the game, but it supports the aesthetic and vision of the game as being 'a crash landed survivor completely out of your element.' When it comes down to it, the only time I've ever wanted a good lethal option to deal with something is because this sand shark has literally followed me a thousand meters to nip at my bum, he deserves to die (which was noted as a bug and fixed properly, good on you devs!)
Besides, sending sand sharks flying with the Repulsion Cannon is fun and cathartic, especially since they can come back for another go!
Anyway, the point is that you cannot and should not try to please everyone, but be faithful to the vision/goal of the entire experience you want to present. Adding crafting time to the fabricator is adding realism to an area of the game that does not need it, does more to detract from the experience of the game than add to it, and will ultimately replace people who complain that 'instant fabrication is unrealistic and ruins my fun' with people who complain that 'the fabrication time is too long and ruins my fun.' (They may also point out how unrealistic it is for certain items to take the time they do, EG 90 seconds for a simple flashlight.)
By the way I don't think this was done to encourage exploration, I don't know where you get that idea. Was it because I stated how the devs want this to be a primarily exploration game? Because that's a side issue.
Holy crap man. I pointed out (someone else) citing exploration as why this was a good thing is nonsense, and you told me I was wrong because
ridiculous I'm afraid. The devs have stated, very clearly, multiple times, they want exploration to be the primary focus of the game.
Not base building.
Not escaping the planet.
Not any other end-game event that may or may not end up in there.
Exploration.
And it just seems that if you're not willing to wait a mere minute or so for something to be built, while you pop outside for that time and just exist, wander off a bit, watch some fish, whatever, then you're doing it wrong and you're playing the wrong game for you.
If you didn't think it encouraged exploration, why did you interject yourself in the middle of a conversation between myself and someone claiming it encouraged exploration by saying I was wrong. < _ >
I personally believe this decision to add a timer to fabrication is a direct response to the dozens upon dozens of complaints about an instant 3D printer being too much suspense of disbelief to get behind. That's how simple this is.
Ah, the "realism" placard. Well, I've pointed out how silly that one is (the change is exactly zero percent more realistic than the old system), and that's exactly the crowd I don't want getting their game-killing, meaningful-design-hating hooks into the developers so all the more reason to oppose it as vociferously as possible. I've seen them ruin enough survival games, thank you very much, including mine, and I really don't want them to start sucking the fun out of the only survival game I still enjoy and actively play.
This point is extremely valid. It's just incredibly sad that it takes this to make people speak up.
Again, this conversation might never have happened if the devs knew people were okay with the fabs working as they were previously.
What happened to the belief of an inherent obligation of a supporter of an early access games to actually help with development on a regular basis, instead of just when something they actively don't like appears?
What exactly are you going on about? I make suggestions, I comment and make posts here and on reddit, I spread the word about the game and get people playing it, what exactly do you want me to do that I'm not doing? Was there some poll or open question or something I missed where they asked "What do you think of the fabber?" Why would I feel the need to comment that they should keep doing a thing they were already doing and it seemed like they would continue doing because there was absolutely no need to change it?
What happened to the belief of an inherent obligation of a supporter of an early access games to actually help with development on a regular basis, instead of just when something they actively don't like appears?
Because people complain more about things they don't like than they do. You also answered your own question there with a key word: 'actively.' A common trend is that when people actively like something, they spend their time and effort doing that thing they like rather than talking about it. When they actively don't like something, they spend that effort either fixing it or complaining about it.
What happened to the belief of an inherent obligation of a supporter of an early access games to actually help with development on a regular basis, instead of just when something they actively don't like appears?
Because people complain more about things they don't like than they do. You also answered your own question there with a key word: 'actively.' A common trend is that when people actively like something, they spend their time and effort doing that thing they like rather than talking about it. When they actively don't like something, they spend that effort either fixing it or complaining about it.
So you're complaining about it because you can't fix it. How about you take some advice that's proven very useful for me? Fix what you can't deal with, deal with what you can't fix.
What exactly are you going on about? I make suggestions, I comment and make posts here and on reddit, I spread the word about the game and get people playing it, what exactly do you want me to do that I'm not doing? Was there some poll or open question or something I missed where they asked "What do you think of the fabber?" Why would I feel the need to comment that they should keep doing a thing they were already doing and it seemed like they would continue doing because there was absolutely no need to change it?
Well clearly I was being general, I have no idea of your individual activity, as you're not the centre of my world.
Comments
I personally think that certain parts of this community want WAY more control over the game than a community should have. We're not the ones making the game, we don't get to make these decisions.
Wow. Really? Realism is not the same as tedium. And selective cherry picking of "Realism" and abandoning the concept if it would make gameplay more convenient instead of less is also rampant.
Plenty of "realism" we are not allowed to have when it would be convenient instead. Like the in game data files talking about getting lots of stalker teeth either either by way of knife fighting sharks, or directly taking them from alien containment. Even the developers have admitted that is "Misleading" off on the Steam forums.
Realistic, practical... And not implemented except as flavor text. Where is our realism there, when it would IMPROVE our survival and lives, rather than just add more padding and hurdles because "something something realism?" and a light shrug, while leaving so many beneficial realistic options out in the cold.
If anything all these crafting timers BREAK immersion. Because all that time spent waiting on a timer, even if you try to busy yourself with other things, just serves to remind you that you are playing a video game that's only slowing you down for it's own sake.
That's not "Impatience". That's forcing yourself to sit on your hands just to get back to actually playing the game properly instead of sorting your batteries and claiming you are making "efficient use of your time". Punishing yourselves and acting like that means you love the game more than anyone else, is not a healthy way to design gameplay.
Calling feedback to such a drastic, and unneeded design change "jumping down the dev's throat" is a rather disappointing viewpoint to hear from what should be a healthy playerbase.
"Give the devs feedback about the game so it can be completed sooner!... Unless we don't agree, then you're just being a cyber bully!"
This game may have many impressive aspects, but the "Crafting" end is not one of them. As well, this game is hardly robust enough on the crafting front to even deserve such timers. With the coming removal of terraforming, there will be even less emphasis on crafting and base building than before.
We have one type of basic room that isn't a tube corridor, and even that is intended to be gated. Because there is nothing else interesting TO gate, but even the most bare bones of generic furnishings.
We have to scan even something as basic as office chairs to unlock them. Having to gate IKEA furniture as hard as you gate a nuclear reactor is quite telling.
Really good way to make your point, complaining about "thinly veiled insults" then hypocritically using them in your next post. You remind me of myself when I was about 15.
Firstly, I was speaking of both extremes, obviously, and stated in the same post the devs have to find balance, the happy medium. I could almost say Please, you can't be this stupid, so don't act that way. But ad hominems are high school level stuff.
Secondly, plenty of people have argued for instant access to everything, but fortunately most people realise that would mean players getting bored too quickly. This is the opposite extreme of waiting a long, long time. Something which plenty of people have also argued in favour of. It comes down to personal preference.
Which is why devs have to find a balance.
Sorry, you're right, I didn't explain this incredibly obvious concept.
People aren't expected to wait exactly 90 seconds while a 90 second craft timer ticks. Neither are they expected to go and swim around for exactly 90 seconds and come back.
You're probably (I'm not privy to the devs thoughts but this is what I suppose) meant to think "This won't be ready for 90 seconds, maybe I'll just come back later for it. Should I make another fabricator so I can have two things going at once? I'll need more resources then, better get out there."
Yes, the developers are so insanely stupid they set out to create a feature with the sole intent to deliberately sabotage their project by wasting their supporter's time.
Please, you can't be this stupid, so don't act that way.
Ok, I've been here longer than you and I will say that adding an artificial wait time is stupid. I want to play the game, not be forced to wait 4 minutes for something. Maybe add in a 4 minute cool down after it is done building, but don't make me stand there waiting. People are saying to go do something else but what should I do? If the next thing I need to do involves the object I'm crafting, what else can I do while waiting?
In Subnautica once something is cooking I'll go somewhere else. Maybe catch fish and collect salt to fill my food locker. Or find more quartz (I always seem to be needing those). Or go play chicken with a Reaper Leviathan.
Yes. The Devs are trying to find that balance between players who want realistsic build times and players who want instant gratification. And I support whatever direction they choose. After all, they're the ones making it.
You simply cannot be serious. I give up.
You're trolling, right, this is bait?
You still haven't explained what this adds to the game (because you can't [because it doesn't add anything to the game {it is a bad idea}]).
Something else. Go get more resources so you have them for later. Catch fish. Look at the game because its beautiful. Try to get some good shots for your picture frames.
Don't you even start that. He may not have put that the best way but it doesn't mean you have to make it worse. There's a distinct possibility some people may have been newcomers, and there's also the possibility that they just made accounts to post after being lurkers.
On another hand its kind of logical that a Seaglide would take longer to create than the simple copper wire its made of ... but 3 minutes? .... hmmm not too sure about this. Im not against such a feature but i will say that they do need to revise the crafting times of some of the items cuz its currently a bit wonky.
In my opinion anything over a minute is alot. I'd make the Cyclops maybe a minute, tops, cuz its so freakin' huge anyone would agree that it would take time to make that. But 3 minutes for a Seaglide .... it takes 3 seconds to make the copper wire, 3 more seconds to make a battery and another 3 for a lubricant, thats 9 seconds total but 3 minutes to combine all those into a propeller .... see my point? needs tweaking if you ask me
You literally just quoted what it adds to the game.
How are you not getting this?
It adds a sense of needing to plan ahead.
It adds a new level of resource management. (The more the timer is increased, the more this is actually true.)
It adds a little more realism to a completely unrealistic concept that many, many people have complained about. (Of course it does, it just does.)
Whether you think it's a good idea or a bad idea, it's your own personal preference.
This idea was implemented in an attempt to give people what they've been asking for, for months, because the fabricator instantly creating things from thin air has always been something most people can't quite suspend their disbelief enough to agree with.
Correct. You've been here longer than me.
And you've made 5 posts.
This change you hate so much was made in response to what people have requested. Perhaps if you'd been more active on the forums, and submitted bug reports, and given praise to the devs for what you enjoy, they would have realised that people like it being instant.
Instead all they've heard is how people don't like the fabricator system. So they changed it.
And now no doubt they'll change it back.
Then it should be all the more telling when on this subject, people with an interest in the game have decided "That's it. This is worth finally posting(on the official forums)/Creating a (official) forums account over".
Rather than simply hoping it sorts itself out while remaining silent, or commenting on other channels the Devs may not watch, or respond to, as frequently.
Hopefully we get more than "It's not literally 6 minutes" on that front, though. When the first thing a Developer says on a subject is a quick drive by minutiae correction... That's not encouraging.
I do expect them to be better than most devs teams however. So we will probably see more than boilerplate assurances they listen to feedback and work very hard. They will likely be willing to admit there is even so much as a CHANCE they went overboard, instead of waving it off as "Well, OTHER people like it and we already worked on it, sorry you don't agree" like a lot of dev teams do, like Killing Floor 2 when they added resistances to trash enemies and covering their ears as their recent reviews tanked into the pavement.
You know what, you're right. I extend my apologies for that foolish comment. I was frustrated to see so many new names complaining about something which was, to me and my like, a good attempt by the devs to give us what we've wanted.
Yes, exactly. That's what's so frustrating. It seems a lot of people only want to "help" when they disagree with something. How were the devs supposed to know so many people liked the fabricator's speed when nobody bothered to tell them?
Well, its not 6 minutes.
A) explain why they are making these changes (even tho they don't owe us one)
C) Realise that it is in fact EXPERIMENTAL and everything may be changed at ANYTIME!
Or if any of these things don't float your boat.. Find a better way of approaching this subject with the devs.. throwing insults around RARELY gets you the outcome you wanted to achieve..
that and just dont touch the bobthebuilder code so it's all irrelevant discussion anyway
It's evident that at least of the people who choose to post in this thread, more people are unhappy with the change than are happy with it. But it's up to the devs to decide whether it's still working as intended or if they should make further tweaks to it or reverse the change entirely. Nobody is trying to force anyone (or shouldn't be, at least), and throwing insults around in either direction doesn't help anything.
But yes, I think most of what needs to be said has already been said, on both sides. There's not much point in talking about it further until we either hear from the devs or get another update that affects things.
Part of why I brought up Killing Floor 2, is one of the most controversial changes they made recently-
A: Went to a beta, and they assured people they would not just shove it out to live.
B: Put it in live 2 days later anyways.
C: Left for E3, told people they didn't have the manpower to remove it.
D; Tweak resistances instead of removing them. Make passive aggressive patch notes about how hard they worked on it, and how "We thought people would like it!". Say how sorry they are about it without actually removing it.
Later, call it "Essentially removed" when called on it, even though trash filler enemies still tank multiple headshots they cold not before (Previously, head health on trash enemies was not only static across difficulties, but basically a guaranteed kill to reward accuracy over mindlessly spamming your weaponry into their torsos. Even to enemies who essentially died to two hits to the leg anyways).
Why this example?: When it comes to early access, it is becoming quickly apparent that "Giving it time to sort out first", even in a beta or experimental branch... Is not enough, you need to jump on that ASAP. Because the longer you let it sit, the more odds even an unpopular change that will turn 90% of the next five pages of Steam reviews negative, will get lost cost fallacy mindsets given for keeping it.
Saying "It's okay, it's only an experimental/just implemented! Don't say you don't like it yet!" is naive optimism at best. or calculated attempts to delay any discontent long enough for the Devs to consider it too much of a waste of their efforts to change their mind, at worst.
Even games where you are a thawed out cryogenically frozen WW2 soldier, teamed up with a club DJ and senior citizen priest. Using a microwave gun built by an airdropped 3D printer, to fight a 100 year old cyborg nazi... You still get the "But REALISM!" crowd talking up game design changes they personally prefer, and then throw realism in the trash when it would make the game more convenient to play instead of less. (Such as asking "If realism is so important, how about letting a giant pile of C4 deal full damage instead of capping itself at maybe 2 C4 worth" getting told realism is now unimportant, since it does not suit their preference).
Maybe through possible base upgrades the fabricator will increase its times.. maybe they are finally adding that command room that will give us more control over our sea bases??
All of this is probably speculation and wishful thinking.. but I'm choosing to believe they have a bigger picture in mind before I start out right saying that this is a bad idea BEFORE it's fully implemented.
Who knows maybe this could just be tied to the power source in the end... solar panels and bio reactors equal longer fab times.. thermal and nuclear equal fastest fab times..
Again possibly talking from a point of pure speculation. But I really want to see where they are taking this.
You may not be playing the "But realism!" card, but it is a popular card to play. Even in this very thread.
That and realism or not, still does not change the primary point of that post. That "You don't deserve to say anything because it's too soon to be allowed a negative opinion!" is bad news for healthy game development. With examples of such to boot.
Whether said well meaningly with some optimistic hope of some invisible and unspoken end result where it will suddenly make sense. Or said to try and stifle differing opinions until it's too late in the dev cycle to change.
So best case scenario in your example, whether I get my item or I don't get my item, the result is me going back out exploring. That part doesn't change. There's no net increase in exploration. In fact, your explanation actually points to a net decrease - because now I'm spending time building additional fabbers and power for them, working on base building, rather than exploring.
Worse, even that doesn't hold together, because now I'm only going to (taking your advice) craft at most one item per return to base. Which means that if I want stuff, especially complex stuff, I'm still going to have to return to base more often, and time spent returning to base is generally time not spent exploring.
You would think if it was so "incredibly obvious" you'd manage to explain it without actively refuting your own point.
Despite how it might seem, I'm actually fine with the devs for trying out a change in experimental. I mostly trust the devs to make good decisions, but I think it's important they get feedback about those decisions and how players are responding to them and enjoying them while it's still in experimental and easy to change. I think this change is, right now, a minor annoyance that serves no purpose other than making the game less fun - I don't want it to become a serious one by the time it gets mainlined because of people like those in this thread spewing nonsense, and it's not an attitude I want to see them adopting going forward thinking it's what all their fans want.
You seem to be conveniently ignoring the whole "should I spend these valuable resources on another fabricator?" thing.
Encouraging careful planning ahead and resource management isn't so bad.
By the way I don't think this was done to encourage exploration, I don't know where you get that idea. Was it because I stated how the devs want this to be a primarily exploration game? Because that's a side issue. I personally believe this decision to add a timer to fabrication is a direct response to the dozens upon dozens of complaints about an instant 3D printer being too much suspense of disbelief to get behind. That's how simple this is.
This point is extremely valid. It's just incredibly sad that it takes this to make people speak up.
Again, this conversation might never have happened if the devs knew people were okay with the fabs working as they were previously.
What happened to the belief of an inherent obligation of a supporter of an early access games to actually help with development on a regular basis, instead of just when something they actively don't like appears?
A level of resource management that is again, just a wrinkle on a pretty efficient system already in place. The biggest hurdle (the constructor) is particularly telling on this point: if I'm building it, that means I want to build a base, which means I already have a place picked out and enough materials to get started on building it. With this change, I now have to wait four minutes to get started, Or rather, now I push my constructor fabrication up by four minutes before doing my usual thing of 'gathering more titanium & quartz 'cause you can never have enough.'
At that stage of the game I now have an additional worry of my sole fabricator being taken up by crafting when I might need it to quickly make some cooked food and water to not die of starvation/dehydration because four minutes is both a surprisingly long time and not long enough to trigger my 'I'm gonna need to prep for this' reaction. It is a worry I would prefer to be without.
Finally, realism for the sake of realism doesn't work. Full stop. Especially in a game that already has a very good balance of realism (swimming and oceanic ecology) and non-realism (the super-technology level that allows the existence of Dark Matter reactors in the first place.)
People all have different tolerances for their sense of disbelief. Much like people all have different complaints and will argue over them. It is ok to not like a thing in a good game.
Example: the limited lethal options available to players to deal with the environment. This is pretty unrealistic and is a legitimate complaint to have about the game, but it supports the aesthetic and vision of the game as being 'a crash landed survivor completely out of your element.' When it comes down to it, the only time I've ever wanted a good lethal option to deal with something is because this sand shark has literally followed me a thousand meters to nip at my bum, he deserves to die (which was noted as a bug and fixed properly, good on you devs!)
Besides, sending sand sharks flying with the Repulsion Cannon is fun and cathartic, especially since they can come back for another go!
Anyway, the point is that you cannot and should not try to please everyone, but be faithful to the vision/goal of the entire experience you want to present. Adding crafting time to the fabricator is adding realism to an area of the game that does not need it, does more to detract from the experience of the game than add to it, and will ultimately replace people who complain that 'instant fabrication is unrealistic and ruins my fun' with people who complain that 'the fabrication time is too long and ruins my fun.' (They may also point out how unrealistic it is for certain items to take the time they do, EG 90 seconds for a simple flashlight.)
If you didn't think it encouraged exploration, why did you interject yourself in the middle of a conversation between myself and someone claiming it encouraged exploration by saying I was wrong. < _ >
Ah, the "realism" placard. Well, I've pointed out how silly that one is (the change is exactly zero percent more realistic than the old system), and that's exactly the crowd I don't want getting their game-killing, meaningful-design-hating hooks into the developers so all the more reason to oppose it as vociferously as possible. I've seen them ruin enough survival games, thank you very much, including mine, and I really don't want them to start sucking the fun out of the only survival game I still enjoy and actively play.
What exactly are you going on about? I make suggestions, I comment and make posts here and on reddit, I spread the word about the game and get people playing it, what exactly do you want me to do that I'm not doing? Was there some poll or open question or something I missed where they asked "What do you think of the fabber?" Why would I feel the need to comment that they should keep doing a thing they were already doing and it seemed like they would continue doing because there was absolutely no need to change it?
Because people complain more about things they don't like than they do. You also answered your own question there with a key word: 'actively.' A common trend is that when people actively like something, they spend their time and effort doing that thing they like rather than talking about it. When they actively don't like something, they spend that effort either fixing it or complaining about it.
So you're complaining about it because you can't fix it. How about you take some advice that's proven very useful for me? Fix what you can't deal with, deal with what you can't fix.
Oh, now I get it.
I disagree completely. We're already suspending disbelief, it's easier to believe the longer it takes. But whatever, it's subjective.
Well clearly I was being general, I have no idea of your individual activity, as you're not the centre of my world.
Oh, now I get it.
I'm done here.
More of the same from you, I guess. You were done before you started, what with snide dismissal and irrelevant tangent being your go-to strategies.
But seriously, what exactly do you think I should be doing in order to prevent people like you from screwing this game up?