>>274925692
This current thread is #691, OP should've linked to >>274848106 (#690).

>>274927967
I think especially the UI still being placeholder developer art is a really bad choice for the general public opinion. You can even hide a lot of unfinished features behind sleek, clean UI art, but if it looks like developer art, the whole game will feel rough and unfinished like that, regardless of how great the feature set really is.

The game being released to early access in this state is also a huge missed opportunity. These days a lot of big titles release with the "early access" label, and that first release is a huge push with lots of sales that can build momentum to create a big community, or break it forever if the reviews merely end up mixed. Some of those games are unfinished alphas, but because some are what were betas in the past and some are straight up practically finished games as even the name implies, the expectations are really high.
And people won't forget these first impressions. Search for any game on google images in private mode and you'll see that most of the top images are from early images when the game first released, though that might be less of a problem for an untraditional title like this. But still, I suspect that people won't even drop that cancelled concert and delayed release to early access, no matter how petty - or not - that seems.

I'm also still wondering whether they'll be able to sustain that critical mass required for an online community to function, especially in an online community where your content generation depends on the players. After all, why should I log in, if no one else logs in? Why should I make worlds, if no one else is going to play them?

>>274928272
Yeah, but not to the devs. A community manager both has to handle the community and report the community's general state, e.g. if they are super upset, back to somewhere where that can be adressed, I assume.