I do. The first Andromeda game appeared in the first year of updates being allowed, and the alphabet being what it is, it was one of the first games I played. I didn’t much care for it.
Later, the author release two or three updates which seemed substantial, and everyone seemed to be really into it. My choice was, do I go back and replay a game that I didn’t really much care for so I can see what people are gushing over, or do I leave it and miss out on what might be good and what turned out to be what the author intended? And I whenever a new update came out, I had to choose again. And if I had replayed it once I certainly wouldn’t be leaning towards replaying it a second time…
I guess that bit about “what the author intended” is the worst. I am all for playing what the author intended, but mid-competition? It’s like I’m having a slice of cake and the author goes, Ah, you’re still eating that? I have a much better batch now, you know. The one you’re having, which granted is the one I gave you first, is clearly inferior. Just so you know.
As a player, that’s how I feel. And people like Jeron, who are proud of being able to add loads of extra content mid-comp, don’t make me feel better. Also, does anyone remember The Elf Maiden / A Comedy of Errors? The game changed so much it changed names in-comp. That was supposed to have been a one-off.
It always has, it’s always worked in previous comps. And it gave the authors time to release a single post-comp version instead of loads of small ones at odd times. Also, post-comp versions did have a certain flair to them - “HERE is the definitive version of that game, you guys, I took on board everything that you said.” This is different from “HERE is a slightly better version of that game, you guys. No, wait, HERE’s a better one. Aha, I made it even better NOW!”
You asked “as a player”. As a player, I’ll wait until the foolishness is over so I can play a version that’s not as volatile.
Very simply, the status quo has changed, the paradigm has shifted. What seems strange to you was the way it had always been done before, and it worked very well at the time.
Having said that, I also find the hoopla strange… because all of this was copiously discussed before. 9 pages, and no one has managed to say anything new, because the people who didn’t read the previous thread are rehashing old arguments without knowing it, and forcing others to respond to it (I just did it myself - I haven’t said anything now that I haven’t said before). That supposed “elephant in the room thread” shouldn’t have been created at all.
EDIT - Fun fact: Lucea’s own game, “Laid Off from the Synesthesia Factory”, had a long gestation period and a seriously rehauld post-comp version was promised.
I found out right now, entirely by accident, that that post-comp version has been released on the 15th of September this year (or at least compiled on that date). The release number is the same on that version (4) as it was on the previous version, compiled on 2015. No announcement of the 2016 version was made anywhere. No NEWS item on IFDB.
If you do such a shitty job of informing people a post-comp release exists, of COURSE no one is going to care. OF COURSE post comp releases like this are going to fail spectacularly.
EDIT 2 - For all their rethoric about games and players, these people - the ones arguing the loudest and most vehemently - seem to be uninterested in ACTUALLY making solid releases players can enjoy and announcing them properly. Updating games mid-comp seems to be more important to them. Meh, is all I can say.