Here is what I think they should do. 1) delete the game from steam. All history of it. Immediately. 2) Apologize to the community. Be up front. Let the people vent, quit trying to mute people that are unhappy with you. Acknowledge it. 3) Tell the community you are taking the next month off to cry yourself to sleep. I am certain that this release is DEVASTATING to the devs. Your instinct when you feel that way is to just duck and cover. I say they should duck and cover, but only after they tell us they are. We are human, and I can only imagine the feelings they have right now. 4) get back to work. Release the current build on the website.

When they told us 4 months ago (or whenever) that we would get steam keys, I said this was stupid. You do not release a game on Steam until it is ready for mainstream criticism. Many people will try it, refund it, and never look at the project again, but only after negative reviews. This was stupid, stupid, stupid. I am not convinced they were doing anything other than receive more money. It should have been released in multiple stages on this website. top 50 fund givers. Let them find the most serious of bugs, if they want. Then the top 200. Then 500. Then all players who received early access. Everything else OP said I agree with.

I can't even remember the name, but it was text based on a BBS. What few graphics there were was ASCII. First graphical MMORPG I played was Everquest.

I have backed multiple "pipe dream" games in the last 2 years. This one about 6 months ago, Star Citizen what, 4 years ago? No Man's Sky when it first went to crowd funding, Elite Dangerous, also when first in crowd funding. Kingdom Come: Deliverance also while on Kickstarter. The only one I didn't consider at the time a risk was Elite Dangerous, because they weren't trying to do anything different. It was pitched as just another space flying game. It has of course grown since then to be more than what it originally set out to do. My point is, I find a game I think I want to play, a game that sees the border lines of what games currently do, and decide to cross over them, and if I like the idea of it, I back them. Some games I have backed were complete disappointments, never getting released, never being finished. Some released way too early, only to be made better after release, but many feel too late. No Man Sky, Gold Rush being 2 examples of that. But even those games who never released, they still pushed those boundaries, and other companies realized how much customers wanted them to push those boundaries too. Why is Elite Dangerous becoming the game it is? I do think it is because of NMS, and Star Citizen. I will continue to support innovation in gaming, sometimes supporting a losing battle. This game has the potential to be something great. But, even if it flops, or delivers only 25% of it's promises, other game makers will see that there are players that want to see this feature, or that feature in games, and they will work harder to get it. I don't support a game based on how it is, I support a game based on how it could be, or what it can bring to the table. Some in this thread sound like they have forgotten why they supported this game. Some, have been waiting a lot longer than I was even made aware of the game last year, and I get the frustration. However, put aside your anger. Some, are saying that there is no way this game will ever be good. Seriously, what would make you think that? A toxic community will ruin this game faster than any dev ever could.