Eco

Eco Dev Tracker




25 Oct

Comment
    SLG-Dennis on Steam Forums - Thread - Direct
Originally posted by SGT R Lee Ermey: Yeah filtering and such and restrictions on inventory can help.

So much simple stuff, you'd think they were getting a big fat government paycheck or something.

The last time we received funds from a government was for the prototype in cooperation with the University of Illinois before Kickstarter, that one didn't even include most of the current features and had a whole different target audience that only changed with Kickstarter. That's more than 6 years ago.

Pretty much everything mentioned here is planned, aside from cloning shop settings and vehicle horns.

22 Oct

Comment

Originally posted by DonaIdTrurnp

Its $30 USD, more than half the price of a typical new release AAA game in dollars. If 500 Turkish Lira is enough to get a AAA game it’s cheaper for me to buy AAA games and even another copy of Eco at that price (Google says 500 Turkish Lira would be 26.89 USD right now)

That's precisely the problem people have been abusing, which is why we had to raise the prices. Just that it's even cheaper than that calculation, especially for Argentina. Plus in both countries it's super easy to get steam cash via VPN without needing a local credit card to make purchases, so anyone can basically do it in one two three.

Comment

See this statement:

I unfortunately also have to announce some rather disappointing news for our Argentinian and Turkish communities:

Effective immediately, we're raising the price for Eco in these regions to mitigate abuse via Steam region changes.

As other development studios have recently observed, we also see a very notable increase in purchases there while the player counts from these regions don't raise accordingly.

We are really sorry that we need to take this step and hope that Steam will soon address the problem, so we can keep the effects on all the players living in those countries as low as possible and lower the prices to what they were before again.

At least for LATAM region we work with Nuuvem who sell region-locked keys for still affordable prices (though notably more than the three USD it was before), so there is an alternative for users living there.


17 Oct

Comment

Originally posted by lolhi1122

ah okay, using gportal and it doesn't have that setting in the config file so I just copied and pasted it and it worked thanks!

You could notify the support about this issue if you wanted, for some reasons several GSPs seem to be at odds with updating their config managers or at least telling their users to check the templates on new Updates for added and changed settings, as dedicated server owners are asked to.

Comment

Originally posted by canadianseaman

PartiallyRoyal pretty much has the only one, playthrough content is something this game is seriously lacking. Almost like the devs have no marketing budget.

Edit: https://youtu.be/DqiSsTggmDg

Well, we actually don't. I stated a while ago somewhere else we prefer to focus on actual development resources with the resources we have, but have plans leading up to 10.0.

Comment
    SLG-Dennis on Steam Forums - Thread - Direct
Trains are not currently considered for EA, sorry.
Comment
    SLG-Dennis on Steam Forums - Thread - Direct
The projects should become claimable once they're stale for a while.

06 Oct

Comment
    SLG-Dennis on Steam Forums - Thread - Direct
We're not aware of any vanishing issues. The items on residence eviction go to the person who placed them, as they are the actual owner. Made sure you placed them?

02 Oct

Comment
    SLG-Dennis on Steam Forums - Thread - Direct
Yes, that's one of the known issues with FoV. We had limited FoV setting to 80 in original release as animations and avatar are not compatible with higher values yet, but added FoV up to 100 in due to request, for those that don't care about the issues. We intend to support higher FoV again with continued polishing of the new stuff, but that will take a while.

30 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by Transparent_Turtle

Yeah, that would have been good to have as an option. I didn't think about it until the first response on here. I'd be willing to put up another poll/post but I don't want to whine about it/come off as a sod. Really just wanted to get some clarity on when help would be coming and hope others had some helpful suggestions.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. If you have an idea about when we might see those changes it'd be lovely to hear.

The animation change is scheduled for a hotfix, but due to requiring art work, it won't be too soon.

Comment

We do intend to address the issue on running, but after discussion not with a disable option, but instead making it more fluent and not showing the hands when you don't look down, as how it's currently it's not natural.

You really should have added an option for "Don't like the animations", cause "I can play for a little while but then have to stop" and even the other options can likely be chosen by people that just don't like them, which isn't helping a lot for actual motion sickness issues.


28 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by Lohseph

The idea that trains should have to be an endgame thing should be thrown out the window. As the game already exists we have technology that progresses all the way from stone age, to industrial then modern. Trains have existed since way back in the 1600s. The first steam locomotives were available right at the beginning of the 1800s, the industrial revolution began in 1760 which is represented in Eco through items like the Steam Truck, Steam Engine, etc. Realistically speaking with the approach that Eco is taking there is absolutely no reason why trains shouldn't be in the game. It fits the direction and it makes sense, especially considering how much travel in the game is done for some players just going from point a to b non stop. If the technology exists already for players to build things like steam trucks, then why not trains too? All that train tracks are is laid down pieces of wood and metal, shouldn't be unlocked any later than mid game tech if it was implemented imo.

It's not about the technological progression IRL mirrored in Eco though, but rather about the collaboration efforts balance-wise and to somewhat display of the impact of them given our abstractions in the game, where a full train would likely literally transport a whole town to another place.

The first (and maybe only) train I'd imagine we'd have would likely be an electric one at current development level. It might be rather unlikely we'd make several of them, as Eco is not a train simulator and the impact of several train classes would not play well with the idea behind them.

But given there is no plans for trains during EA that's all pretty moot, as there is no design work going into them anytime soon.

Comment

Originally posted by DonaIdTrurnp

Huh. In my experience people want to be closer together than possible.

To the point that about half the time that I leave space for a future road, someone will build a house or store in it.

Maybe due to you probably actually playing on smaller servers with about recommended world size, while many servers use way too big worlds, plus the ones mentioned by the other comment on yours about bigger servers that use bigger sizes, but as recommended size?

If there isn't much room, people are more or less forced to live together (that's the intention of the small sizes on all official servers but White-Tiger for the very reason of what I'm talking about here, otherwise they would be bigger given their usercounts), but once there is more room, my experience has always been the same: People settling as far away from each other as possible (probably to exactly not have someone claim their free space), leading to issues with infrastructure needs to get to everyone else, but also ultimately over the course of the cycles leading to several towns as we had intended.

Comment

Originally posted by WolfHunter98

There a guess on time for that? End of year?

It's supposed to be the next one, but I don't think end of the year will be realistic. We generally don't do ETAs though, so not much more I could say.


26 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by Caloris97

I can definitely see what you mean but in my experience there's never enough farmers/gatherers mid to lategame. It was an unnecessary change imo (might be unintentional) that will fortify the problematic in my view but ig gatherers might be more essential at least early on.

This change was indeed fully intentional, it was never intended for gathering being as quick as spamming E while walking by until vehicles come in to begin with, but animations were planned for later on. There is several parts in Eco that just got a simple implementation to start off and that will change over time.

As usual it's a subjective thing. I'm aware people generally don't tend to like change and that some think it's annoying, but it's not news that Eco has a focus on manual labor and making the progress to newer technology very noticable.

The thought for gathering animations game-mechanically indeed went into the direction of /u/Praecipitoris though, we actually consider that as a buff for the profession. In opposite to you I usually see too much stuff on the market though, e.g. a o...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by ZookeepergameFirm942

As it stands right now. The word is that the Eco world sizes will not be getting any larger. In fact the default will be reduced to match White Tiger's world size. With this in mind, a large travel distance is out the question. Realistic physics for bridges is a start but they have never hinted at making that a reality. I am in the group of hating bridges that span half the world. The best way would be to increase the need the newer logistical means. Boat being able to transport a large amount of goods across the water, or trains being able to ship a large amount in one direction.

The maximum world size has already been limited to 2.56 km² in Update 9.5, so that is already in effect. As usual you can make as big worlds as you like and happen to technically work, but anything beyond that is not supported and doesn't provide the intended gameplay boundaries and for purposes of coming ecology changes probably never will - you can still play on whatever size you want though.

The swimming change is something I can imagine to happen and would surely help the row boat out a lot, I do fear that some players will not like that additional limitation of their options though. It's an idea I personally like a lot though.

Valheim Stability rules is something I like a lot as well, but given we do want to support the many extreme monumental builds we have, making a system that effectively prevents weak bridges while not limiting the monumental creative builds would prove difficult or impede each others goal. In the end, we would still want bridges to be poss...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by DonaIdTrurnp

I haven’t played in a while, what are the biome restrictions?

I just mean the distribution of resources in the world, which is intentional for that purpose and going to be expanded further in the future. We want to encourage people to settle in different biomes depending on what they do, but not really to just move as far away as possible due to 'land ownership' concerns, as many people do. The forming of local communities that need to interconnect was the general idea.

Comment

Yes, that's a known bug being worked on. We actually have tweaked these a few times and somehow they broke in different ways after each.

Comment

As described in our "No Namecalling" rule in the sidebar, if there was an actual ToS violation you can report that directly via mail to me with sufficient and conclusive proof.

That requires a ToS violation to have happened though. I understand the behaviour of some administrators might be frustrating, but from my experience every story in the end had at least two, if not even more sides and all that public shaming does is creating more fighting and drama without anything coming out from that. Which is we decided that at least on our channels we'd prefer to not see such things. It's up to the community if they want to keep a list of servers elsewhere that they do not recommend, but I wouldn't recommend doing such one.

We do plan to introduce a system for dev recommended servers in the server list, just like other games have and are thinking about a rating system as well, but as you have already noticed the moderation efforts that would need to go into that would pro...

Read more

23 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by Birphon

so then more validation for boats/trains to cover the longer distances.

I feel like everything before the first gas powered truck is "local" use only. The first gas powered truck onwards is dependent on what the situation is like based on your server's Oil Baron/s. If they have a large Network of gas and can supply a lot of it in a large area then maybe the Boats/Trains aren't needed as much.

Let me extend on that. For all features we add we of course have an idea what they're supposed to do - but given Eco's "Framework Style" the most interesting part is what players will actually ultimately do and come up with on their own.

The hype about boats is massive, so massive the idea behind it seems to be much more limited than the expecations for change via boats actually seem to be to a degree I'm personally not super sure what everyone is ultimately going to do with them that improves their life so much.

A main, very obvious point from us is boats for fishing, that's what we wanted to do. Another is early game get-around quickly with the row-boat instead of swimming or having confusing ways with ramps only. But once infrastructure kicks in, Trucks will be typically more useful aside of when you really want to transport a lot (like multiple trucks with the ferry boat) to specific points reachable by ocean. I just don't see that happen very often or be needed...

Read more