AnarchyBrownies

Yeah it's definitely not in the search though. Wonder why that is because my understanding was that the mod would still be around.

I thought in the stream he just said "See this is the type of thing that is holding back release." I don't recall any time he said that the cloning was THE thing holding back release.

Not necessarily I don't think. That was just a good example of one of the things that really makes the game unplayable at this point. I think I know where you're going with this though, and you're right people have misinterpreted that EXAMPLE as the new benchmark for achieving a go ahead for release.

Agreed. On the first part of that though, if the person asking the question is using the term loosely then we're obviously going to have a ton of DLC. It's an alpha. We're going to be getting weapon DLC, Vehicle DLC, medical DLC... DLC out the ass. That's why I interpreted it in a worrying way where this person seems to be waiting for some super special exclusive content. People like that can eff off... in my opinion.

My god. Did some ask that question as a joke or was it serious? Have gamers been officially and successfully tricked into thinking the current brand of DLC (withheld from release to be sold shortly after) is a good thing? EDIT: Or DLC in general really. I think the only time DLC was okay was when it first started coming out and it was a process where they'd release it for a price (long after games were released) and after a month or two they'd make it free for everyone. Now companies just happily fracture the gaming community for their respective games a few weeks after release.

My cat and I await the standerlone alpher patiently. Background Info: He was laying down but he got restless. He's just so anxious.

"We've kidnapped this person to be our blood slave because they are O-."

I think there will be a lot of tweaking as the alpha/beta develops. I think the number of zombies will be increasing which means if people start seeing larger swarms then killing them will be nearly impossible if their health is increased. Either that will be a wonderful thing or it won't be and their health will have to be reduced again. I can imagine a lot of back and forth on this to find the perfect balance of number and strength. As of right now I agree that they do seem too easy but I also haven't played the game, maybe I just haven't seen enough of the sticky situations they have to offer! I don't even think you need to justify their health with some realistic interpretation of how strong a zombie could/would be. You just have to make a decision on what type of threat you want them to be for the game and adjust their difficulty accordingly. I think they should be the primary threat personally! So quite strong or numerous or both!

I thought everyone knew that the network bubble was a big task that was going to take a while. Never did I think that that piece of development was going to take a few weeks. In fact afterwards I redownloaded the mod (I hadn't played it in months), stopped coming to this part of the forums so much, and forgot about the standalone for a while.

If you have no faith then I really think you should just bail from the game. "Did it again." What is your point in this statement? So let's say he's delayed it twice after giving false hope- once in 2012 when he decided to create a whole new project (I don't even count this time), and again in June 2013 when they decided to develop the network bubble. Are these not perfectly acceptable and advisable changes to make? I think if someone is looking at this reasonably and from a position of wanting the game to be great, they'll see these delays as having excellent and legitimate reasons. It's not like they're making predictions for what they're currently working on and then saying "it turns out this will take us 8 months longer." Both times they've made significant and very important changes to take the game in a new and better direction. These changes affect the way the game will run at its core and allow development to continue. I'm not worried about soon in this case because they are so far into testing their whole newly constructed engine architecture. It would be difficult to have to start something huge from scratch now. Any delays now are more likely to be the result of glitches that make the game unplayable. Those glitches do exist but there hasn't been any indication at this point that they're worried about being able to fix them. Again, I always leave wiggle room for the unforeseen and for things that I don't understand. I'm not a programmer, I've never developed a game, so there are plenty of things about the process I'll never know about. But this "soon" is different in how far along they are with the architecture and scope of testing.

Ah see now we're getting into personal definitions of soon. They made a ton of progress in the "final lap" and we're still within that time frame and now it looks as though it's imminent. So he's perhaps correctly given that impression if that's what you took it as. He took a small break from public communication (certainly didn't disappear) for a push but there was also no promise of what was on the other end of that push. What if they had a push and at the end of it they were nowhere near their goals? Instead they had a lot of success so we're lucky. But you're getting these impressions based on personal expectations I feel. Or do you disagree?

I can only think of one time where I legitimately thought it would be out soon and that was back in June or July when he said he couldn't imagine the game not being out before some event in August.I can't remember the event. Some gaming convention I think. That was before the whole network bubble thing. Once they explained they decided to head in that direction and that it would take a while I've never had any real expectations for release and I never felt like he has given any. As St. Jimmy just posted, today he emphasized very soon, and I'm optimistic about that, but I also realize that there are plenty of reasons that a delay could happen. I think it's unrealistic to think we'll have to wait for another six months even. My guess would be within a few weeks. I don't see it as being a case where it's either in whatever window Rocket publicly gives us or it's 10 years.

Alright, fair enough. All I can say is I'm 99.9% sure they have internal release dates and they've missed those plenty of times. Sometimes when something gets fixed, it breaks something else. Or a small problem ends up having a more complicated solution than previously thought. Refer to Rocket's posts in the "Announcements" section where he explains this. Also, is there a reason that whether or not it comes out this year matters? Nothing special happens on December 31st or January 1st that would impact the game. EDIT: They've done the bulk of the work on the foundational programming and have hit their goals for server performance. They still have a lot of work to do to keep improving this but that part is good enough for release. I don't know if you saw the stream today, but they're trying to get rid of bugs like the "doppelganger" and other things that sort of break the game. Again, I'd urge you to read Rocket's latest update in the announcements section.

This is what I'm completely missing. There are no obligations for them to tell us anything. None at all. If they start "breaking promises" after we've paid for the game ("Yeah we've decided the game doesn't actually need zombies") then there is a reason to start complaining. As of right now it's just a group of people making the game and saying it will be out when it's out. That's reasonable enough on its own. We are owed NOTHING.

You sound upset. If you don't trust what Rocket says then stop listening. Go play something else, preoccupy yourself with something else, and it will be out sometime. If you think they have behaved unprofessionally or will be incompetent as they continue to develop the game then you don't have to buy the game! I believe it's difficult to say when it will be out because they don't know when it will be out. In fact, I believe I heard Rocket say they did a test weeks ago (this may have been from beginning of November) that he thought would put them over the top for server performance and allow them to get it out. This didn't work out and they had to keep working. I imagine there have been a lot of internal release dates that have been missed, could you imagine if they had given each one of those out? No one's holding out on the people that want to play the game. They'll release it when they can. There are very good reasons to assume that "soon" genuinely means soon.

u r dum -first troll feed attempt

I missed this one. What exactly is this bug? In what way should items be highlighted?

If there's one thing that really changed the experience of the mod it was when people stopped even considering anything other than a CoD play style. Killing on sight isn't an issue in itself, but a lack of variety in play style, in my opinion, very much is.

As a Canadian, I enjoy being underestimated. Going to have to KoS for the first 10 people I see just to make a point.

I think this is a good example of why any benchmark for release should be interpreted within reason. I think this is a relatively new bug and it's one that really can't exist in the release. It makes the game unplayable. It also doesn't seem like too big of a deal to fix, judging by what Rocket said.

It's unbelievably beautiful.

I remember Katana having a detailed post about the environment and the overall atmosphere and feel of the game. I think they've come along way in establishing a post-apocalyptic feel.

"aye cat u" - Rocket Perhaps some evidence of neurological damage due to oxygen deprivation on Everest?

They've been doing this testing for a long time! EDIT: Pre-release just means pre-alpha, doesn't it?

Still has to be playable though, right? Within reason, can't expect everything to go smoothly. But I think this would be why they're looking for a minimum of server stability. If I don't see some fucked up glitches though, I'm going to be upset.