You know that’s not how it works, right? You’re the one accusing Funcom of lying and being sneaky, so the burden of proof should be on you.
But what the hell, since the question is an easy one, why not answer it anyway? Off the top of my head, some of the things that would be Siptah-specific, fall under the umbrella of early access, and have nothing to do with Exiled Lands:
- spawning and behavior of monsters inside the Maelstrom
- loot tables and bosses inside the Elder Vaults
- disposition of NPCs in summoned surges
Don’t tell me you forgot that Siptah is a separate map with unique content and gameplay features?
I’m willing to bet it’s because nobody asked a hard question about this subject yet. Yours are easy
I don’t recall anyone confessing to being a Funcom spokesperson. Or proclaiming themselves to be one, either. Or professing, or aspiring, or whatever it is you meant to imply.
Easy access is implied forgiveness, yes, for whatever that is actually labeled as early access. So when people say “Siptah is boring and empty compared to Exiled Lands, it should have more content”, that’s where you might hear “Yeah, it is, but it’s only early access, so it’s supposed to get better… hopefully.” When people say “the new healing system sucks and I hate it”, anyone who answers that it’s early access is mistaken at best.
Yes. And Funcom community managers themselves have patiently and repeatedly explained it to you and to everyone else interested: since anti-undermesh measures can have false positives that kill players, they won’t activate it until they’re reasonably certain that those false positives are all gone. They started working on those measures before they started working on Siptah, and they have been slowly gathering the data about false positives. This is why they have more data on false positives in Exiled Lands and why they feel it’s ready, and why the same doesn’t hold for Siptah, which is much newer and hasn’t produced enough data.
Now, I’ve seen them explain these things in at least one thread where you were active and asking about it, so I know you’ve seen it. As a matter of fact, I have linked that same explanation in this thread before. I’m also quite certain that you have no problems with reading comprehension in general.
So now, you tell me: are you intentionally trying to misrepresent the situation or are you accusing them or lying or do you favor some third flavor of intellectual dishonesty that I’ve overlooked?
Siptah is not “driving the early access adoption cycle”. Siptah, and Siptah only, is in early access. Really, it’s not that hard.
Also, why would you be surprised that the DLC that is in early access – i.e. unfinished and not ready for full release – doesn’t get a feature that the old and supposedly stable (heh, I kept a straight face while typing that) map does?
You’ve yet to provide any proof that Conan Exiles “regressed to early access”. You’re just repeating that claim without substantiating it, at all. To make it even more comical, you asked me to substantiate the rebuttal of your claim and then crowed “bishop takes rook”
Of course there’s an agenda. Every time someone claims to be objective without providing any objective, factual evidence for their claims, there’s an agenda. It doesn’t have to be big, important, sinister agenda. It could be as petty as mere self-aggrandizement. I don’t really know or care what the “agenda” is, but nothing you’ve said passes the test of being “objective”. But it’s a really nice attempt at scare tactics: “big bad Funcom is scamming all of you by putting the game back in early access!”
See? That’s precisely what I’ve been pointing out over and over and over again, all the time. You keep claiming that Funcom is “holding the entire ecosystem under the early access branch”, without providing any proof of that at all.
If you’re so convinced that your claim is objective, it shouldn’t be hard to point at something they did that affected the whole game, and yet they said it’s because of early access.