I've already shared disposable's design with the team.
Despite what you might think, feedback is evaluated.
I believe you, I also believe that you are an honest guy.
Let me word it differently, whenever I see someone criticizing something on discord, you seem to be very defensive. It is not appreciating. Also there is no direct feedback. By no means I am saying that you have to. Only consider how it feels for potential customers or Backers.
Also stating that you think that crowdfunding is part of the problem while working for a crowdfunded project is, questionable to say it politely.
But imagine you're trying to create something, a project where you already have plans for how things are going to work and interact, but you've got a thousand people all shouting different directions/ideas/instructions at you.
Than share these plans, make people understand.
See with me I still have not put my money into PP as I still have no fucking idea were the ride is going. And I suck in all the information I can, that is why I joined discord (never had been on discord before) because I was excited about the game and wanted more information. Than I spotted inconsistencies, but as I had read up on the whole discord before, I would not address them on discord as it didn't felt like it would be appreciated there.
Be not mistaken, discord is your turf, you are the community manager, people respect your position and probably want to be on good terms with you to get information. RPGcodex is the opposite, it can be a reality check. I would never talk on discord like I talk here. And I am pretty sure others do so as well.
A lot of the time, things that people ask for just don't mesh with the desired end result. You can't design a game via armchair committee.
Absolutely agree on that.
Also as I have stated in this thread I understand now that I had a wrong idea of what PP will become, I made wrong assumptions. I think if you were to communicate more specifically / in detail there would be less room for wrong assumptions. You can't reverse the Fig campaign. You do not have to feel for people that gave their money because they made wrong assumptions, but figure out how you would feel if you were them. You don't have to be emphatic, but if you decide to do so I believe you could at least get some of them back onto the boat.
But I do still feed ALL feedback back to Julian and the team. I even fight for a lot of stuff myself. Sometimes, things get tested to see how well they work out.
For example, we're currently testing how the game plays with allowing multiple shots (TUs allowing).
That is fantastic, but how should we know about that, if it is not communicated?
And yes, you said you are testing it, that does not mean that it will be in.
Still consider this as well, if you always say "is just concept" and "might be changed" or "is not final" it gets a little silly and worrisome as there is nine more months of development left, when do things start to get finalized?
Again though, what was shown in the Fig campaign was marked as concept - and concepts do change.
Actually I tripple checked that, were did it say it is just concept, were did it say that you will redo most/all of the graphics for tripple A graphics. Please show me, I honestly couldn't find it.
An X-Com clone was never promised and how close to X-Com/XCOM people feel it should or shouldn't be is only a matter of opinion.
True, sadly it was never stated in detail what the X-Com/XCOM ratio would be.