I think Twitter and other leaks is part of their information management plan. They happen quite frequently- often Johan.
It would seem so, but it's a ratehr poor information management.
Cities: Skylines had a TotallyMoo. HOI has nobody.
@mdw1985 You know that people like you are the reason the devs stop posting stuff on the forums right? Demanding stuff in an very hostile tone against the devs which is far from being productive and if anything only contraproductive.
I don't see anything hostile in what he wrote honestly.
He's pissed at the way the info was given.
Constantly nagging the developers in threads not related to the issue at hand isn't exactly friendly or respectful either. You have no rights, as you haven't bought anything yet. So lay off the criticism and nagging. If Paradox service, behaviour or product do not please you, you can simply choose not to buy it and move on.
The problem is not that simple though. I agree with you, we can vote with our wallets. We have no rights as such. But Paradox claim the community to be important. And here it is the community. We have not bought the game yet, but we're all potential customers and as such we should be treated fairly. Should Paradox accept all of our demands? Of course not. Should Paradox keep us informed? Well, no, but a post on the forum is not that time consuming. Is there a shitstorm after that post? Who cares?
The problem I see here is that in some cases the devs will reply friendly to anything that is asked to them. You know, in a DD if someone points out some details they're superfriendly and asnwer/joke with the users. Then, if you asked about the project itself, they hardly reply.
So, is the dev team a bunch of people we can more or less freely interact with? Do they act like a big publisher's studio or like an indie studio? Somewhere in between, of course. But this causes issues.
Now,
in regards to the beta itself, it could mean anything and nothing.
Some Publishers have an internal department that guarantees that its product are up to standard.
They have a sort of check list which vary and might include things like:
A) Game needs to be stable
B) Game needs to have tutorial
C) Game needs to have less than X bugs...
Problem is that some Publishers have also departments that say whether the game is fun or not fun. Whether it needs changes or not. However, I really doubt this is the game because it seems to me way too late to change core mechanics (such as fuel/supply).
So,
- if someone at Paradox all of a sudden has decided that the game is not fun, we're in deep excrement. But I seriously doubt this to be the case for a number of reasons.
- if someone at Paradox has decided that the game doesn't meet certain requirements, it really depends on the requirements themselves. I suppose this to be the case. The game probably has more bugs than expected or all the features they've added have slowed the game too much (maybe the supply system "has no oil" to save computing?)
