Problem is, water is very much graphical and takes a lot of time to get pretty. The water we've seen so far hasn't gotten there yet, it's actually fairly ugly. So I'd be fine with them taking their time with the water, cheatcode basically means it's a feature at that point, and I'd rather we get water in its most beautiful form than an ugly prerelease.
First impressions are important. [yesnod]
I'm not completely agree.
I mean, of course first impressions are important, but we are not dating a girl here. It's the alpha of a game, the goal of an alpha is to see the evolution, the improvements.
A cheatcode does not mean that it's a feature, but "a not finished feature" which is really different. The same way the showed a "underconstruction" version of the coaster tool in alpha 1, everyone knew it was under development. (to be truly implicit, they can always use a very clear password like "underdevelopmentwater")
I mean, for now, people are using a blue tile to simulate lakes, or a blue path to simulate river.
I think it's even uglier than the most basic of basic water.
And when they will improve water in the alpha 3, everyone will applaud (just like what we have just seen with the evolution of the coaster editor between alpha 1 and 2)
The only question is : Is the water, even if it's basic, is sufficiently developped to be given to users or Is it just a texture with too much bugs ?
Anyway, they "accidentally" showed water for a reason : to collect our opinion, so this is mine :
- If it's just for a "visual issue", and the water just "works" pretty well, then, they can put it behind a cheatcode. It will be seen as a good thing (such as coasters) even if we want something better in the next alpha.
- If it's full of bugs, does not react well to physics, and that in fact it's just a placehold on a plan, then ... I'm agree, just don't, and take your time.
My 2 Cents