bit-gamer.net

Fans angry with Rust dev for working on other games

Fans angry with Rust dev for working on other games

Of the 25 man team at Facepunch, 20 are still working on Rust and nobody has been removed from the Rust team to work on other prototypes.

Fans of early access open-world survival title Rust were angered by the game’s developer announcing a prototype for a new game.

The new game is called Riftlight, an arcade style space shooter. The fact that Rust is still in Early Access on Steam and is unfinished has made several fans question the move made by developer Facepunch, feeling that Rust should be finished before it works on anything else.

A blog post from Garry Newman of Facepunch highlighted some of the more colourful comments the company had received since making the announcement. Reactions including calling the developers lazy, criticising the early access business model and of course typing in caps lock.

’Are we crazy? Are we doing it wrong? Should every person in the company be working on the same thing? Should HBO make one TV show at a time? Should Warner Brothers make one movie at a time?’ said Newman. He adds that the company is not requesting funding for this and three other prototypes that it is currently working on and is instead funding this through what Rust and Garry’s Mod have earned for the company.

Talking to Kotaku, the developer clarified that only 0.04% of revenue from Rust went towards prototype development and out of the studio’s staff of 25, five of them are working on non-Rust projects.

‘I am guessing that a lot of game developers bigger and smaller than us have multiple prototypes in the works, but they aren't showing them to you. The only thing that makes our situation remarkable is that we're willing to talk about our process and show our experiments,’ added Newman.

Facepunch’s strategy in developing new prototypes even when a title is in early access is far from unique. Double Fine did something very similar when it launched its Kickstarter campaign for Massive Chalice when development on Broken Age was still being carried out.

20 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
bawjaws 29th July 2014, 13:27 Quote
Gamers in over-entitlement shocker! Some people really need to get a grip and stop whining like little kids :D
cps1974 29th July 2014, 13:47 Quote
Gamers with breathtaking sense of entitlement, I'm with bawjaws - get a grip children!
GravitySmacked 29th July 2014, 14:14 Quote
Hmmm I can see where they're coming from to be honest; I mean they're funding Rust's development and it's far from complete.

I expect many would see it as them taking their foot off the pedal with regard to that project, plus wasn't this the game where they scrapped the old engine recently too?

I appreciate the developer has no obligation to just work on one game but the fact they're letting people pay for it as early access means they need to be aware they're being scrutinized more that normal.
Pete J 29th July 2014, 14:17 Quote
If anything, I'd commend Facepunch for being sensible. Always good to plan ahead! Anyway, even if those 5 people were put back to working on Rust, it'd probably have little to no effect on delivery times anyway.
bawjaws 29th July 2014, 15:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GravitySmacked
Hmmm I can see where they're coming from to be honest; I mean they're funding Rust's development and it's far from complete.

I expect many would see it as them taking their foot off the pedal with regard to that project, plus wasn't this the game where they scrapped the old engine recently too?

I appreciate the developer has no obligation to just work on one game but the fact they're letting people pay for it as early access means they need to be aware they're being scrutinized more that normal.

Just because they're working on other projects doesn't mean that they're not working on Rust, and to be frank they're under no obligation whatsoever to work on a crowdfunded project to the exclusion of all other business projects. I agree that they're under greater scrutiny because Rust is crowdfunded, but I think the issue here is that those who have put their money forward need to realise that they've not paid for Facepunch to work on Rust exclusively. In addition, people need to realise that they are taking a risk but parting with their money before a project is actually finished. Again, it's an over-inflated sense of entitlement at play here.

If the developer had said that they were stopping all work on Rust whilst they do some other stuff, then the backers might have a case to be displeased, but we don't even know whether Facepunch have taken guys away from Rust to work on these new projects - for all we know, they might have had 5 guys working on other stuff throughout.
hyperion 29th July 2014, 22:29 Quote
It's not over-entitlement. People gave their money in good faith. When they see that the company isn't putting 100% into it then their faith is shaken. If it was a group of investors they would've grabbed the developers by the balls and squeezed a shitty game out of them in record time. I would say that if you have already paid for something in good faith, then you're the exact opposite of over-entitled.

How many times did HBO and Warner Bros depend on crowdfunding for their products? They pay for their own stuff so they do whatever the hell they want to do. You get crowdfunded? You invite every pledge to scrutinise you.
forum_user 29th July 2014, 22:34 Quote
1 vote for the fans.

The devs have taken the money from fans who want a complete game. Seems reasonable to expect the game to be completed.
rollo 29th July 2014, 23:06 Quote
This is the reason games should not do early access. They put themselves under pressure to deliver to a deadline if they go the early access route.

Personally stopped buying early access and croud funded games at the moment as very few have seen any real completion.

With the biggest ( star citizen) facing delays of a year +.
erratum1 29th July 2014, 23:16 Quote
I guess to the fans it doesn't look like they are in any rush to finish it while it's bringing in money they could just keep it on early access.

It's always near the top of the steam top sellers.
loftie 29th July 2014, 23:52 Quote
All the people who were working on Rust, are still there. None of them have been pulled to work on their other games. People have backed a game, the game is still being made, they haven't paid to rent a games dev studio.
Adnoctum 30th July 2014, 03:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by forum_user
1 vote for the fans.

The devs have taken the money from fans who want a complete game. Seems reasonable to expect the game to be completed.

Where is the announcement that Rust is being abandoned?

It is normal industry practice that when a game is deep in development that planning and concept development begins on other projects, often several.
There are developers who are heavily used at the beginning of a game project (such as artists and modellers) who aren't as heavily used later on when these assets are already complete.
Instead of them sitting around and twiddling their thumbs, they are put to actual paid work developing art and concepts for the next project.

This is so normal in any industry, the outrage is so stupid, it must be from people who have no idea what it is to work on large projects.

To use a hackneyed car analogy: it is like expecting the auto workers who make the car body to stop working on more car bodies when it moves on to be fitted out with interior and drivetrain. Or expecting them to move over and begin fitting those items themselves, despite perhaps not being suited or competent to the role.
Adnoctum 30th July 2014, 03:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperion
It's not over-entitlement. People gave their money in good faith. When they see that the company isn't putting 100% into it then their faith is shaken. If it was a group of investors they would've grabbed the developers by the balls and squeezed a shitty game out of them in record time. I would say that if you have already paid for something in good faith, then you're the exact opposite of over-entitled.

How many times did HBO and Warner Bros depend on crowdfunding for their products? They pay for their own stuff so they do whatever the hell they want to do. You get crowdfunded? You invite every pledge to scrutinise you.

No crowdfunding, no pledges, no kickstarter, no promises other than a finished game at the developers own schedule, not that of the early access purchasers.
forum_user 30th July 2014, 06:58 Quote
Adnoctum, you can do your best to defend them, but when they blog that they are self funding these multiple other projects - using the cash they made from selling this game - then of course the fans can be as angry as they like.

As far as I'm concerned if we buy a complete retail game then the profits pay for new projects. Or publishers finance new projects. But when gamers pay for early access to a game, regardless of technicalities, the game should see completion BEFORE money is siphoned away into new projects.

Personal view.

(Added)

I do see negative fan responses where it is unwarranted. Take for example the announcement that Valve have redesigned their controller. Then see various forums where responses read along the lines of "omg! they should finish HL3 before making controllers!!!".

The issue here is that the money truly is Valve's to do with as they please - not 1 fan has paid for HL3. THAT is self funding.
will_123 30th July 2014, 09:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by hyperion
It's not over-entitlement. People gave their money in good faith. When they see that the company isn't putting 100% into it then their faith is shaken. If it was a group of investors they would've grabbed the developers by the balls and squeezed a shitty game out of them in record time. I would say that if you have already paid for something in good faith, then you're the exact opposite of over-entitled.

How many times did HBO and Warner Bros depend on crowdfunding for their products? They pay for their own stuff so they do whatever the hell they want to do. You get crowdfunded? You invite every pledge to scrutinise you.

Agreed, Rust is far from polished. It needs every dev it can get just now. Running little side projects off rust earnings is a bit of a kick in stones.
Lenderz 30th July 2014, 12:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by will_123
Agreed, Rust is far from polished. It needs every dev it can get just now. Running little side projects off rust earnings is a bit of a kick in stones.

Why do you think its off rust earnings and not Garrys Mod earnings? Facepunch has made quite a lot of money from Garrys Mod, and they don't owe their early access people anything. They're pretty clear what they were getting into and the majority of the company are working on that one product. It would be foolish for a business to put all their eggs into one basket.

I mentioned the risks to buying early access Rust on a RPS articles and Garry all credit to him replied to me and agreed on them. I'd link the conversation here but I'm not sure linking to other gaming websites would be proper e-etiquette.

Also sometimes throwing more manpower at a project slows it down rather than hurries it along, if everyone has a job to do and is getting on with it you cannot really expect more.

If anything I think its a case of caveat emptor when it comes to anything in early access.
loftie 30th July 2014, 12:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by forum_user
Adnoctum, you can do your best to defend them, but when they blog that they are self funding these multiple other projects - using the cash they made from selling this game - then of course the fans can be as angry as they like.

As far as I'm concerned if we buy a complete retail game then the profits pay for new projects. Or publishers finance new projects. But when gamers pay for early access to a game, regardless of technicalities, the game should see completion BEFORE money is siphoned away into new projects.

The thing is, it's Early Access not crowdfunded. If it were crowdfunded, you know people pledging money to the development of Rust I'd understand where you're coming from. But it's not, it's early access. It's more like a preorder with alpha/beta/gamma access.
Corky42 30th July 2014, 14:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lenderz
Why do you think its off rust earnings and not Garrys Mod earnings?

Maybe because it says in the article that 0.04% of revenue from Rust went towards prototype development and out of the studio’s staff of 25, five of them are working on non-Rust projects.

Personally i don't see why people are throwing hissy fits. When you buy an early access game you are buying the game in it's current state and any future updates or development, if any.
AFAIK nothing about early access prevents a developer from abandoning a project a week after someone buys it, or never releasing a completed game.
ashchap 30th July 2014, 14:07 Quote
By paying for an early access game you are paying to: a) play the game in its current state and b) receive any updates that happen to be released. Nothing more.

If you think otherwise then you haven't understood the concept and should probably try reading about things before you pay for them.
forum_user 30th July 2014, 14:24 Quote
I disagree with discolouring Early Access this way. Paying for early access is a way to buy a retail game at a lower price, and before it is completed. Ok so it says in the terms that there is no guarantee a game will be completed, but that covers the backs of the providers whether that be Steam or the devs or whoever if the company goes belly up. When a dev earns a great deal of money, gamers have a right to expect the full game. To support a dev over the gamers is not only showing support for naive and/or unscrupulous devs in the future to screw their customers, but also it's counter-the-consumer.
Lenderz 30th July 2014, 14:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Maybe because it says in the article that 0.04% of revenue from Rust went towards prototype development and out of the studio’s staff of 25, five of them are working on non-Rust projects.

Whoops I miss that bit about 0.04% of revenue.

My mistake, I still stand by my overriding point that you're buying early access, not control of how the studio is managed.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums