Any teaser what is being worked on?

[BurtHutt]

I was told that HC is going to try to be more innovative. I was wondering if they can tell us if that is happening next update? I don't need details. I would like to know if something different/unique is going to be attempted.

 

I have not really enjoyed most of the content added by HC. Having a story arc that looks a lot like what we've had for decades isn't awesome. They've also been somewhat drawn out and really focused on story vs. gameplay - we need both.

 

Here's to hoping 🙂 

[GM_GooglyMoogly]

46 minutes ago, arcane said:

steer clear

 

Steer as in cow, clear as in water . . . I see what you did there.

[Seed22]

2 hours ago, Krimson said:

IF you can get on it. I tried to apply and got no response. 

I think right now apps are closed because there have been a number of leaks from folks(I think? Not sure) and until some stuff is cleared up with the rules it won’t be open.

 

 

But it will open back up! 

[lemming]

2 hours ago, arcane said:

Unfortunately there are people on the discord that I steer clear of. So, not an option.

Can't say the same people aren't on the forum portion of the testers, but that's where the patch notes, etc... get put

[PeregrineFalcon]

@Glacier Peak I just want to know when the new page/issue is going to the test server so we can all try it out. Any ETA?

[Troo]

On 6/20/2024 at 1:16 PM, Seed22 said:

I think right now apps are closed because there have been a number of leaks from folks(I think? Not sure) and until some stuff is cleared up with the rules it won’t be open.

But it will open back up! 

 

so they are working on stuff that is in beta.. or close to live beta.

[Seed22]

3 hours ago, Troo said:

 

so they are working on stuff that is in beta.. or close to live beta.

It’ll be awhile before anything being worked on is close to open beta, but there is stuff being worked on yeah.

 

Obviously can’t talk about it but just thought I’d give a reason why getting into the beta would be difficult

[Glacier Peak]

12 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

@Glacier Peak I just want to know when the new page/issue is going to the test server so we can all try it out. Any ETA?

No idea.

[GM Crumpet]

On 6/17/2024 at 12:41 AM, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

I predict there will be stuff that people love, and things that people hate.  And that these stuff and things will be on open beta Soon^TM.  

 

And finally, that when these things and stuff do get revealed that I will spend hours refocusing the focused feedback threads.  😔

I predict a riot!! 😛

 

[GM Crumpet]

Well there's this thing I like, and that thing, and oooo there's that too!! I don't like that though, and that's not quite ready....

 

So there you go, that's all I know ff the top of my head 😛 

[GM Crumpet]

18 hours ago, PeregrineFalcon said:

@Glacier Peak I just want to know when the new page/issue is going to the test server so we can all try it out. Any ETA?

Unlike commercial game companies with schedules we release when we are ready and not to a deadline. On the one hand it means we are pretty sure the worst bugs are fixed as we don't have an arbitrary deadline (looking at you Cyberpunk 2077), and on the other hand it means we don't have a set release date where we can drum up excitement for the big day.  We kind of go "well that's looking good, next Tuesday?" 😛 

[lemming]

On 6/21/2024 at 6:00 PM, PeregrineFalcon said:

@Glacier Peak I just want to know when the new page/issue is going to the test server so we can all try it out. Any ETA?

 

[Xandyr]

On 6/20/2024 at 8:22 AM, GM_GooglyMoogly said:

I might get in trouble for posting this, but the people have a right to know!

 

  Hide contents

 

SURF N TURF!!!

[Pyriold]

On 6/22/2024 at 9:49 PM, GM Crumpet said:

Unlike commercial game companies with schedules we release when we are ready and not to a deadline. On the one hand it means we are pretty sure the worst bugs are fixed as we don't have an arbitrary deadline (looking at you Cyberpunk 2077), and on the other hand it means we don't have a set release date where we can drum up excitement for the big day.  We kind of go "well that's looking good, next Tuesday?" 😛 

Next tuesday confirmed.

[brasilgringo]

On 6/20/2024 at 5:45 PM, SeraphimKensai said:

I can't stress this enough.

 

If you're interested in what's being worked on and would like to have a good opportunity for input, then joining the Gold Standard Testers group is the best thing you can do. The group doesn't bite, it's friendly and filled with knowledgeable people that want the game to succeed.

 

There's no cost to people to join, and it's a pretty easy process that takes a couple days at most to get all the necessary permissions to actually test stuff out.

 

Joining the discord doesn't give Closed Beta access though. They've um, closed, Closed Beta access and are apparently "working on" how they will offer it again, but for now you're out of luck. The discord doesn't discuss closed beta stuff in open channels unless someone makes a mistake.

[Sanguinesun]

This talk of things people will hate and rioting doesnt help the community, especially due to the lack of transparency.   Its nonsense that a volunteer community run game has to even run testing in a closed and insular manner first, making a second "testing" open phase where feedback is not uncommonly derided; and then once live, making it implied that those that didnt participate in the testing have no right to criticism.  

 

  

 

 

[GM Impervium]

While I can't speak for the devs, I feel as though they wish to avoid "too many cooks in the kitchen", as it were. Especially when many of those "cooks" tend to be resistant to any change and won't even test them before posting about how much the game is ruined because of said changes. Volunteers shouldn't have to put up with that kind of bad-faith negativity, which is exactly why our beta process is structured the way that it is.

 

And trust me, the devs aren't infallable. They know that. They DO make mis-steps, and most of those get caught and fixed/redacted during the closed beta/experimental stage.

 

But sometimes when it seems like they aren't listening to feedback, it's because of other factors that they're not at liberty (or mynx, or infernal) to discuss. I think a lot of people will be pleasantly surprised with a feature of the next update, and how it fixes certain issues with both older and newer sets... assuming it goes live, which it may not, which is why things don't get discussed outside of the CB environment, we don't want to get any hopes up like I just did there.

 

 

Edited June 26 by GM Impervium
Typo

[Bionic_Flea]

2 hours ago, GM Impervium said:

And trust me, the devs aren't infallable. They know that.

 

LIES!  Number Six is infallible.  Jimmy, however . . . so fallible.

[Jacke]

1 hour ago, Bionic_Flea said:

LIES!  Number Six is infallible.  Jimmy, however . . . so fallible.

 

But Flea, how will @Number Six know if you don't tag him.

 

And perhaps @Jimmy's only failing is being irritated by...Fleas.  😺

[Glacier Peak]

9 hours ago, GM Impervium said:

Especially when many of those "cooks" tend to be resistant to any change and won't even test them before posting about how much the game is ruined because of said changes. Volunteers shouldn't have to put up with that kind of bad-faith negativity, which is exactly why our beta process is structured the way that it is.

Quoted for truth! Patch note preachers are so frustrating when they flood feedback threads with non-testing diatribes. Like, telling the community you're quiting the game because of a proposed change - it's like going to a Wendy's to complain about the price of gasoline. 

[Troo]

hey look at that, straw man fallacies and hyperbole exist.

 

------- -- -------

 

@GM Impervium just fyi, it's hard not to read into your statement a little.

If a player feels existing popular power sets should remain or be treated with a light touch rather than face dramatic changes, beta testing might not be for them.

We, players, should accept our input may not be welcome. We also need to accept that we get what we get.

I will acknowledge that a small group of like minded people can fall prey to the echo chamber without some civil discourse or dissenting opinions. It happens.

 

[GM Impervium]

4 hours ago, Troo said:

hey look at that, straw man fallacies and hyperbole exist.

 

------- -- -------

 

@GM Impervium just fyi, it's hard not to read into your statement a little.

If a player feels existing popular power sets should remain or be treated with a light touch rather than face dramatic changes, beta testing might not be for them.

We, players, should accept our input may not be welcome. We also need to accept that we get what we get.

I will acknowledge that a small group of like minded people can fall prey to the echo chamber without some civil discourse or dissenting opinions. It happens.

 

 

When put like that, I acknowledge that my statement came on a little strong.

 

Being of the opinion that we shouldn't change things IS a valid one, and one the Devs should (and I believe do) keep in mind as they propose and enact changes. However, if "no" is the only idea someone brings to the table, especially when they don't test things out, it's not very helpful.

 

That said, we don't want "yes-men" either. If a change is actually bad, and can be proven so via numbers and actual play experience, that's valuable feedback and will cause devs to scrap an idea, or re-tool it until it becomes workable.

[Glacier Peak]

2 hours ago, GM Impervium said:

However, if "no" is the only idea someone brings to the table, especially when they don't test things out, it's not very helpful.

2 hours ago, GM Impervium said:

we don't want "yes-men" either

 

Shout these from the rooftops!

[Super Atom]

 

 

👀 ?

[Sanguinesun]

13 hours ago, GM Impervium said:

 

When put like that, I acknowledge that my statement came on a little strong.

 

Being of the opinion that we shouldn't change things IS a valid one, and one the Devs should (and I believe do) keep in mind as they propose and enact changes. However, if "no" is the only idea someone brings to the table, especially when they don't test things out, it's not very helpful.

 

That said, we don't want "yes-men" either. If a change is actually bad, and can be proven so via numbers and actual play experience, that's valuable feedback and will cause devs to scrap an idea, or re-tool it until it becomes workable.

 

 

In feedback seen with changes post said changes, typically a "no" isnt commonly given without explanations why.  Lack of transparency and filtering "testing/testers" tends to groom a sychophantic situation reinforcing an epistemic bubble of development.  Then later only in cases of extreme criticism post implementation does it have the remote chance of being walked back and even then unlikely.   

 

In other words, the whole process is one in which most feedback that isnt congruent to the intent of dev's designs is essentially tossed.