Problem is I was borned in the 70s, and that crap is from 89 I believe. By De La Soul. And we have a phone company in Sweden called "3".if you call a person using their service you have to listen to that shit. Queen has nothing to do with bad music ;-)
Recite the litanies. Fire up the Gellar field. Beta is coming. In all seriousness, I'm for option three until the beta is finished. I myself have used Steam and direct downloads, and I've noticed usually far less problems with updating when I used steam. Just a small gamer's opinion.
Huh...? Idk how you got that, but the jist of what I was saying is just this: The beta is for testing the game, the only options worth considering are the ones that optimize this process. That is option #3. #2 wouldn't slow anything down if they disregard any feedback from the people playing the outdated client (because not doing so could lead to bad info and slowing down the process), but then it would just be pointless to include it. It would be a nice gesture (and I wouldn't rally against it), but one that I feel tells people that it's cool not to test the beta test, which is something I personally don't agree with. (Because less testers slows down the process! I be consistent.) That about it.
Obviously, the majority vote because they are terrified by the thought that they could get a new update on the half-hour later.
do #3 just try to keep them balanced as possible so we may still be able to play with each other on servers if we please (so for big updates maybe update them at the same time)
I personally could care less about getting the fastest possible beta updates, my vote is because I want the fastest possible release date. Release means mod support, stable game, all of the features and work starting on cool post-release features like space travel and such. It could be said that people who want otherwise just want to play the game no matter the state as soon as possible, while refusing to be flexible, but things are never that general across the board.
I say 3 as well. The ease of updating simply makes it a no brainer for at least the first phase of beta. Things will be rockiest and easy updating will make it all the smoother. Once phase 2 begins I don't see any reason not to transition into more option 2. In this case, people who either can't (or simply won't) use Steam, will only be missing out on what is arguably the worst part of the beta.
And I'm sure that for the release this beta will bring too little benefit. Because there's more players than testers.
Option 4: Provide Steam key with regular updates, and you employ a monkey just to sit in the studio pressing update for the DRM version when availble. On a serious note, I vote for option 3, some of us don't have a problem with Steam (in fact I have over 500 games purchased on it) and allow those who don't with the DRM-free version. This would in my opinion keep everyone the happiest. Those who want it now, and those who (for some bizarre reason) wait for it later. You can continue to pump out regular updates for us bug hunters to find. While those using the DRM-free version reap the benefits of a more polished/stable version. In regards to multiplayer compatibility, we are just going to have to put up with the fact; that for now at least, both versions won't be compatible. You can't have both right away, as they seem to be exclusive avenues of progression. Either the players put up with which version they play with, or wait until both are compatible enough to play with each other. And if they don't like it...tough.
I think that 2.5 is a great solution! Something like just posting the DRM free with the steam version at start but then update only the steam one during the beta ,just to give something to our poor com'rad who don't have steam for any reason like you said. Keep making us dream EDIT: But if I have to normally, well ...number 3!
DareDreamer We are just like you paid for participating in the beta. And no one warned us that Steam will be required, when we did the pre-order.
Funny, I don't recall paying for the beta. In the end we should all want the process to run at its smoothest. Hindering the efforts of the developers by insisting on a more difficult to manage model, just to get at the game sooner is rather selfish.
From a purely personal perspective I like option 1 best. But since more people prefer faster updates and Steam, I vote for option 2 as compromise in this situation. If I understand it correctly, the 'problem' with incompatible multiplayer versions would be limited to the first phase of the beta ('Progenitor') after which both distribution platforms are treated equally in all three options anyway. Concerning the first phase: The free-DRM users will without much doubt gladly accept a sometimes incompatible version instead of getting no game at all. And Steam users don't get any disadvantages with option 2 if free-DRM updates are sufficiently less frequent to not interfere with the development speed.
First of all: Thanks for keeping us up to date so frequently. You really care about the users and the fact that you share your concern with us and ask for our opinion proves again that you really care. And for my opinion: I think the third option is the best, because it is the best compromise between frequent and save distributes and developer friendliness.
