CO Word of the Week #9

[TripleAgent]

Mariina honestly seems to be living in a weird parallel world right now where: a) the pre-release marketing was something that just happened and was a complete surprise; b) the game didn't fulfil all the promises of a) because of the aforementioned surprise; c) customers who've shelled out £80 for a fully fleshed out game and don't get it should not be cross but should instead ask nicely when they can expect to receive the game they paid for, and also suggest how the developers should improve the game, as if they were actually responsible for fixing and improving the game rather than the developers.

I mean, I get that as CEO you have to defend your company, your employees, and maybe your job... but how can she be so out of touch with what, to almost everyone else, is simply the reality of the situation? It's just absolutely baffling.

I don't know, but her words in the last two WoWs and this interview make me even less hopeful that this game will last long enough to become great, sadly. Prior to this week I was pretty hopeful that the game would start hitting the ground running in Q1 after a rough launch, I'd barely touched it since the December patch as it didn't solve most of my issues with the game but still had hope.

A game like this survives on its community, we learned that from CS1. Going to the media and blaming the community that paid you money for broken promises is a great way to kill a game and a series.

 

[unmerged(524934)]

I don't know, but her words in the last two WoWs and this interview make me even less hopeful that this game will last long enough to become great, sadly. Prior to this week I was pretty hopeful that the game would start hitting the ground running in Q1 after a rough launch, I'd barely touched it since the December patch as it didn't solve most of my issues with the game but still had hope.

A game like this survives on its community, we learned that from CS1. Going to the media and blaming the community that paid you money for broken promises is a great way to kill a game and a series.

I must admit, I did have a bit of a wince when she felt she had to mention the "great" discussions she/CO had had with PDX last week - I can't for one moment imagine it was in any way a remotely "great" experience for her personally but she seems to be sticking to the "tough it out and wait for the nerd rage to subside" line. Whatever keeps the lights on and the nameplate on the door, I guess.

 

[S.C. Watson]

Welp. If next week's word salad doesn't at least have croutons, I'm officially out.

The game has a lot of promise, and I sincerely hope that it lives up to it. But right now? Eh.

 

[Macquarrie]

I removed this game from my Steam wishlist. I wasn't going to play it until bikes were added, and at this rate bikes will never be added.

 

[Krazel]

I removed this game from my Steam wishlist. I wasn't going to play it until bikes were added, and at this rate bikes will never be added.

That's a strange line in the sand but I respect it.

 

[unmerged(524934)]

That's a strange line in the sand but I respect it.

I mean, he's not wrong.

 

[Art1985]

I have read that Colosal Orrder is worried about toxicity and disrespect from community, but for me disrespect and toxicity started from game company publishing unfinished game with things not included in the game.

 

[dumpster299]

That's a strange line in the sand but I respect it.

I think it's emblematic of the general complaints with the game. People want CS2 to be "CS1 but better", not "a few new things but missing a bunch of stuff that CS1 added in 2015". (I checked -- yes, it's about 100 months ago that CS1 got bikes.)

I'd love to see the market research or design docs they used to decide "yes, manually placing mailboxes is definitely what everyone wants, not bikes", for example. I suppose maybe it's "people like bikes so we should make sure not to have it at launch, so we can charge them for it in DLC"…

 

[Krazel]

I'd love to see the market research or design docs they used to decide "yes, manually placing mailboxes is definitely what everyone wants, not bikes", for example. I suppose maybe it's "people like bikes so we should make sure not to have it at launch, so we can charge them for it in DLC"…

You're on to something here. Spot on actually. You put things in the game nobody asks for and call them QOL updates with the new game. The things they know people want will be stuck behind paywalls. Smart and sad at the same time...

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

This hurts considering the genuine representations Avanya seemed to make acknowledging the major problems with the game and with CO's actions/inactions around release. The attention and high expectations came from CO's marketing and promises that have been acknowledged as incomplete/misleading! And now the problem isn't CO, it's the community! Seriously?

The shortcomings should spark the things you mention, but a game not fulfilling its promises should spark the developer giving refunds!

This was by far the most hurtful thing and most outrageous.

To be fair, I’m not certain (hoping tbh) if the quotes stated in the article is simple rehashings of previous WOTWs and the lead up to release video, or is a new interview with the magazine. If it’s the latter, then I can’t believe after so many WOTW with feedback that CO is still doubling down on “it’s not our fault, it’s urs”. They are treating the “community”, aka people who criticise the game, with utter contempt, some of which like myself were utmost fans of CS1.

It’s a good thing too that content creators are finally speaking up. CPP at least gave us the benchmark videos before release, and I respect him highly for making the effort. The other major ones have been deathly silent or actively gaslighting.

I like this quote from CPP:

“I will admit that I was taken aback by this description of what’s happening in the Cities: Skylines community regarding Cities: Skylines II,” he said. “I have noticed increased negativity. However, I wouldn’t say that I have noticed increased toxicity. And bluntly, I think the negativity is completely understandable and predictable.”

“Colossal Order has been transparent, talking with the community, but has not taken accountability for the release of the game,” Philip said. “I hear this over and over again. Many players appear to want them to admit that the release state of the game was poor, say that they are sorry, and make some gesture to make amends. To date, they have delayed the DLC release — which actually was a huge negative for people that purchased the Ultimate Edition of the game — but not made amends. [They haven’t] provided the information that people are looking for.”

 

[Derangedteddy]

Mariina honestly seems to be living in a weird parallel world right now where: a) the pre-release marketing was something that just happened and was a complete surprise; b) the game didn't fulfil all the promises of a) because of the aforementioned surprise; c) customers who've shelled out £80 for a fully fleshed out game and don't get it should not be cross but should instead ask nicely when they can expect to receive the game they paid for, and also suggest how the developers should improve the game, as if they were actually responsible for fixing and improving the game rather than the developers.

I mean, I get that as CEO you have to defend your company, your employees, and maybe your job... but how can she be so out of touch with what, to almost everyone else, is simply the reality of the situation? It's just absolutely baffling.

As a mod developer I have experienced multiple instances of toxicity, and I can't imagine what CO devs are dealing with right now. I'm an avid critic of the game, but I've had my fair share of run-ins with enough crazies to know that Mariina is not making this up. One person told me to "do your job you little b****" and complained of "poor service" when I refused to continue the conversation. Another stalked me for months and made a Reddit post collating posts and comments I've made on multiple platforms trying to "take me down a peg" because I had disagreements with them in Discord months ago (and haven't interacted with them since). This same person asked someone else in the Discord if they were autistic because they disagreed with them. This morning, someone posted a link to Cities by Diana's latest video on the official CS YouTube channel on r/ShittySkylines and tore into her, saying that the video was terrible and that her build was bad, justifying it by saying "well at least she's getting paid."

I'm very, very frustrated at the state of the game and especially modding support (check my comments earlier in this thread if you think I'm a shill), but the toxicity IS a problem. I think that Philip is on an island on his Discord server and enjoys a positive community because that's what he's curated for himself (more power to him, I love his community and his channel), but he doesn't spend much time in other Discords, Reddit, or these forums to see the true extent of the toxicity that has been going on, and (respectfully) does not speak for all of us.

We can be angry. We can be frustrated. But some of us have GOT to learn how to channel that anger into concise, cogent, factual comments that seek to drive the conversation forward. It's not everyone. It's not even most people in the community. But there exists a large enough cohort of toxic people that it bears mentioning and repeating until it stops.

 

[anydaytv]

As a mod developer I have experienced multiple instances of toxicity, and I can't imagine what CO devs are dealing with right now. I'm an avid critic of the game, but I've had my fair share of run-ins with enough crazies to know that Mariina is not making this up.

Just want to say that is absolutely terrible, and I agree with you that no one should face that kind of behavior. I'll be honest, I was hesitant in replying because the truth is: emotions and the bottom of an internet forum are about as oil and water as you can get. But -- you know what? I was looking over your behavior improvements code awhile back just so I could get a handle on what to expect jumping into modding CS2 (C++ Guy here) and I really appreciated it, so I just wanted you to know that.

Thank you.

 

[Derangedteddy]

Just want to say that is absolutely terrible, and I agree with you that no one should face that kind of behavior. I'll be honest, I was hesitant in replying because the truth is: emotions and the bottom of an internet forum are about as oil and water as you can get. But -- you know what? I was looking over your behavior improvements code awhile back just so I could get a handle on what to expect jumping into modding CS2 (C++ Guy here) and I really appreciated it, so I just wanted you to know that.

Thank you.

That's awesome, friend! I'm glad you got some use out of it. Check out the unofficial modding Discord if you haven't already. It's a great community of devs there who are very helpful and friendly for newcomers!

 

[MohawkWolfo98]

As a mod developer I have experienced multiple instances of toxicity, and I can't imagine what CO devs are dealing with right now. I'm an avid critic of the game, but I've had my fair share of run-ins with enough crazies to know that Mariina is not making this up. One person told me to "do your job you little b****" and complained of "poor service" when I refused to continue the conversation. Another stalked me for months and made a Reddit post collating posts and comments I've made on multiple platforms trying to "take me down a peg" because I had disagreements with them in Discord months ago (and haven't interacted with them since). This same person asked someone else in the Discord if they were autistic because they disagreed with them. This morning, someone posted a link to Cities by Diana's latest video on the official CS YouTube channel on r/ShittySkylines and tore into her, saying that the video was terrible and that her build was bad, justifying it by saying "well at least she's getting paid."

I'm very, very frustrated at the state of the game and especially modding support (check my comments earlier in this thread if you think I'm a shill), but the toxicity IS a problem. I think that Philip is on an island on his Discord server and enjoys a positive community because that's what he's curated for himself (more power to him, I love his community and his channel), but he doesn't spend much time in other Discords, Reddit, or these forums to see the true extent of the toxicity that has been going on, and (respectfully) does not speak for all of us.

We can be angry. We can be frustrated. But some of us have GOT to learn how to channel that anger into concise, cogent, factual comments that seek to drive the conversation forward. It's not everyone. It's not even most people in the community. But there exists a large enough cohort of toxic people that it bears mentioning and repeating until it stops.

This toxicity has been around for a long time even before release. When I raised constructive criticism on Reddit about it the game pre and post release, I was told to shut up or leave the subreddit, so I did. One of the mod developers was exceptionally rude to me post release after I asked how to use the Thunderstore, because I was used to Steam Workshop and didn’t know how to use it, and wrote in a manner that suggested I was disabled. A YouTube content creator (not CPP) with a RTX4080 was rude to people that didn’t saying that the game worked fine with no issues.

This is why I feel I find it deeply frustrating that the messaging from CO is so one sided, that because of the backlash they have received they then begin to push back on toxicity. They were perfectly content to sit back when it wasn’t applying to them. Toxicity should be condemned on all fronts, not just when it applies to you only. This frustration is further compounded by CO’s response - this is the 3rd or 4th time they have accused the community of some form for the games failures without acknowledging how they might be responsible it, and this is feeding into the negative loop. Their condemnation of toxicity is correct, but when you compound this with all the stuff they have been saying about the community in general (hint the games detractors), it gives the impression they are deflecting blame from themselves and threatening to withdraw.

What you received and what CO have received should be condemned, and I do thank you for opening our eyes to toxicity. But as CPP says, the vast majority of us are here to provide constructive and hold CO accountable for the actions they have done. Instead, CO keeps painting the entirety of us with the same toxicity brush. The only exception seems to be avanya, who seems to want to engage constructively and for that I’m deeply appreciative.

 

[dan1979]

I removed this game from my Steam wishlist. I wasn't going to play it until bikes were added, and at this rate bikes will never be added.

Same.

Bikes need to be in a modern city builder for it to be realistic and they obviously were intended. So either the game was unfinished at launch or they would be DLC. With no confirmation they would be a free update soon after launch, it was a no buy for me.

I was not surprsied when they said bikes weren’t important enough to make the cut for launch (but we saw that big motorbikes and car accidents
were). CS has always been focused on the belief that 99% of players want to build car-centric US cities.

 

[I3aneFuL]

Welcome back to the weekly update on what’s happening at Colossal Order and what to expect for Cities: Skylines II. Last week we had in-depth conversations with our publisher Paradox Interactive on the priorities and goals for Cities: Skylines II for 2024. There’s really nothing new when it comes to the previous statements: Modding support, console versions, and the Expansion Pass content are to be worked on and released during the year. From the great discussions emerged an important decision however: the modding support will roll out gradually as the features enter beta and we won’t wait for all of them to be fully completed before setting them live.

What this means in practice is that we’ll start giving the mod creators early access to the modding tools as soon as the code modding and Paradox Mods are ready for testing. If everything goes as planned a Public Beta version of the code modding and Paradox Mods will be available a couple of weeks after that. We’ll continue to work on the Map and Asset editing as they require a bit more attention still. Map editing is expected to be available sooner than the Asset editing, but at this time it comes down to iteration time and the feedback we’re getting on the usability of the tool. Asset editing is unfortunately suffering from technical issues and as long as players are unable to save and share the assets there’s no point publicly releasing the tools. We do have a plan for the fixes, but it might take months in the worst case I’m afraid.

To summarize on the priorities of the modding support:

1. Public Beta version of code modding and Paradox Mods will be available in the live build by the end of March
2. Public Beta version of Map editing available in the live build together with code modding or soon after
3. Public Beta version of Asset editing to be announced, only after the technical issues are sorted can we roll out the tool
4. Continue to work on the modding support and get out of the Beta stage during the Finnish fall.

We’ll keep resources on the modding support throughout the entire lifecycle of Cities: Skylines II as we know there are many improvements and feature requests we can work on to help the modders achieve their goals even after the initial Beta release.

The work on the console versions is ongoing and while gated by the modding support we’re making progress. We’re not committing to any timelines as there are too many unknowns at this time, but we’ll keep you updated and will communicate the moment we have something to share. For the Expansion Pass, the artists have the Beach Properties content almost ready and we’re on track for its release.

Before those bigger releases, we’ll have one more patch coming out. After this, we’ll include the bug fixes and performance improvements in the releases to reduce the amount of individual patches. Patch 1.0.19 is going through its first round in QA at the moment and will be released after it passes the checks. Full patch notes will be released on the day the patch goes live, but you can expect fixes for stuck maintenance vehicles and an additional fix for abandoned dogs, who will now be returned to their homes. While the work still continues on the land value, we have an improvement so pollution properly affects the value. And last, but definitely not least, we’re currently testing a fix for the tax bug with crazy high or negative numbers.

Keep following our social channels for news about the patch release and hope you enjoy the game in the meantime. Have a lovely week!

Sincerely,
Mariina

To be honest I am hugely disappointed
For me CS2 was one of the best games last year and I played since release.
But from my point of view „each“ patch made the game worse, resulting in me stoping playing with your Christmas update…

The reason: from my point of view you are reducing the level of simulation each and every time. At the moment the whole industry/cargo system seems to be broken

But instead of focusing on improving or even mentioning the issues with the simulation you are addressing the next QoL updates (yes I played CS1 with mods - but to be honest: they will not get me back to playing the game)

BR

 

[Civ5rako]

Another news article about the state of the game (...)
(link removed as the spam filter seems to complain about it)

(...)
The shortcomings should spark the things you mention, but a game not fulfilling its promises should spark the developer giving refunds!

Thanks for bringing that article to our attention.

I would however prefer if we as community wouldn't circle anymore around the "question" of refunds. Without having any insight whatsoever in CO's financial situation, from the information we do have (the "making of" video stating three years of delay for the release, the current timeline reaching to the end of this year) we can at least assume that CO's situation is not all rosy at the moment ("in-depth conversations with our publisher Paradox Interactive" doesn't sound like too much fun for them).
And we shouldn't forget that they have to pay salaries to their people as well.

Do I want to find excuses for the mistakes (and there have been plenty) CO has made? No, not at all. They seem to have messed up in a stellar way.
But I really don't see them in any position to even think about refunds (not to mention that it might be Paradox's decision as well).

Should they be thinking about a way to compensate the current customers for their mistakes? Yes, they should.

But bringing up the (in my eyes - you may think differently) unlikely to happen "refunds" again and again doesn't help anybody either.

 

[yalex]

Thanks for bringing that article to our attention.

I would however prefer if we as community wouldn't circle anymore around the "question" of refunds. Without having any insight whatsoever in CO's financial situation, from the information we do have (the "making of" video stating three years of delay for the release, the current timeline reaching to the end of this year) we can at least assume that CO's situation is not all rosy at the moment ("in-depth conversations with our publisher Paradox Interactive" doesn't sound like too much fun for them).
And we shouldn't forget that they have to pay salaries to their people as well.

Do I want to find excuses for the mistakes (and there have been plenty) CO has made? No, not at all. They seem to have messed up in a stellar way.
But I really don't see them in any position to even think about refunds (not to mention that it might be Paradox's decision as well).

Should they be thinking about a way to compensate the current customers for their mistakes? Yes, they should.

But bringing up the (in my eyes - you may think differently) unlikely to happen "refunds" again and again doesn't help anybody either.

Consumers are not responsible for the financial management of a company, that is the responsibility of a company's executive management overseen by its board of directors, or whatever governance structures it has in place.

It's fair to assume that there was pressure on meeting the release data due to financial reasons, but selling a product that arguably has relied on 'false and misleading claims' (as defined as the threshold for complaints in my home jurisdiction of Australia) through its promotion and advertising is not the way to generate a sustainable positive return.

It is reasonable for consumers to expect a product/service to meet the expectations that were set by its manufacturer/developer (Colossal Order) and its distributor/publisher (Paradox).

The requirements for refunds will differ between jurisdictions.

In Australia, consumer Law is fairly clear in that refunds are the responsibility of the retailer (Steam et al). The retailer in turn can expect the manufacturer to provide a refund to them. Whatever Paradox thinks about the matter (as a publisher/distributor) is irrelevant. In addition, case law in Australia has confirmed that Valve (as owners of Steam) need to comply with Australian laws.

See: https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/a...toc--advertising-techniques-that-can-mislead-

 

[Gonzoez]

Thanks for bringing that article to our attention.

I would however prefer if we as community wouldn't circle anymore around the "question" of refunds. Without having any insight whatsoever in CO's financial situation, from the information we do have (the "making of" video stating three years of delay for the release, the current timeline reaching to the end of this year) we can at least assume that CO's situation is not all rosy at the moment ("in-depth conversations with our publisher Paradox Interactive" doesn't sound like too much fun for them).
And we shouldn't forget that they have to pay salaries to their people as well.

Do I want to find excuses for the mistakes (and there have been plenty) CO has made? No, not at all. They seem to have messed up in a stellar way.
But I really don't see them in any position to even think about refunds (not to mention that it might be Paradox's decision as well).

Should they be thinking about a way to compensate the current customers for their mistakes? Yes, they should.

But bringing up the (in my eyes - you may think differently) unlikely to happen "refunds" again and again doesn't help anybody either.

I disagree with you in some things... The question is not in the refund itself. The refund is just a word we commonly use. If it will make you more comfortable, I'll call it a "compensation" for the purpose of this post.

So, in order to talk about a compensation, CO has to admit the wrongdoings/mistakes on their part. Because if they haven't done anything wrong (willingly or accidentally) there is nothing to compensate in any form. Currently CO is in denial claiming that everything works as intended, except for minor bugs so there is nothing to compensate.

I don't think that many of us, "refunders", really hope to get our money back... That would require some legal actions which none of us have money to pay for... And given PDX losses according to their earning calls - these money are either long gone or giving them back will put PDX back into red...

It doesn't have to be "here is your $90 back and get out of here"... It could be "yes, WE made mistakes, WE should have done better. We will make it up to you with extra free content in a form of XYZ". They could just work a few extra hours per week (for free, not for overtime pay) and get us a... I dunno... Bicycle DLC? TPM mode baked into the game? Whatever, doesn't really matter as long as it is not a set of few lame assets...

Fixing bugs and releasing mod support a year later does not qualify as "compensation". It doesn't even qualify as "fulfilling their part of the deal" anymore, because the deal that I (personally) paid for was "money in exchange for the finished game".

Personally, I don't think that I would even use that hypothetical "compensation", because at the moment it feels like I'm done with this game forever. But being treated like a respected customer (which we all should feel like) would make me feel less angry about lost (well, I'll call it lost, even though I'd rather use another word) money and spoiled holidays break.

 

[Civ5rako]

Consumers are not responsible for the financial management of a company, that is the responsibility of a company's executive management overseen by its board of directors, or whatever governance structures it has in place.

It's fair to assume that there was pressure on meeting the release data due to financial reasons, but selling a product that arguably has relied on 'false and misleading claims' (as defined as the threshold for complaints in my home jurisdiction of Australia) through its promotion and advertising is not the way to generate a sustainable positive return.

I completely agree with you upon that.
And as I have said, CO seems to have messed up in a stellar way. I understand very well that people are disappointed and angry - and they do have every right to feel that way, no doubt about that.

If you want to pursue a lawsuit in Australia against Valve/Paradox/Colossal Order/whoever I honestly whish you to be successful. The way in which customers have been mislead wouldn't have been possible in any other industrial sector, I think and if somebody can do something against such practises, he will have my full support.

But reading the question "what about refunds?" in every third posting (at least it feels that way to me) gets tiring.
For the reasons I have stated I don't assume them to even consider that (nor to be in the position to even be able to consider it).
So a legal way seems to be the only viable to achieve to get some refunds. But it is a different way than raising that question again and again and again in forum postings.