Stop Shaming The Devs
AgentSkelly
Chicago Illinois At The Moment Join Date: 2017-03-09 Member: 228760Members
Chicago Illinois At The Moment Join Date: 2017-03-09 Member: 228760Members
Ok so this is my personal opinion but i keep scrolling though the multiple threads here and im noticing that almost half of them are negative and are not supportive towards the games devs. they're trying their hardest to make a great game and make every one happy. but they're
just people and they're trying to make a fun amazing experience but they will try to do everything they can in their power to make every one happy. but there are some things they just cant do though such as multiplayer. ive seen hundreds of negative and offensive comments directed at the devs because they wont be doing multiplayer or co op play. but what these people need to realize it would take YEARS! to rebuild the game for multiplayer because its currently built for single player. and they said they may release another version of the game kinda like dont starve with friends but only after the full release. and only maybe but another topic i see people blaming and shaming the devs over is performance and bugs. ITS A PRE RELEASE PROGRAM! c'mon people games are always bound to run into issues at some point. especially ones in development and theres no need to attack the creators they understand you may be angry or annoyed. but there trying they really are so please just dont be so aggressive towards them there job is already hard enough. Feel free to leave your opinion below. Thanks!
just people and they're trying to make a fun amazing experience but they will try to do everything they can in their power to make every one happy. but there are some things they just cant do though such as multiplayer. ive seen hundreds of negative and offensive comments directed at the devs because they wont be doing multiplayer or co op play. but what these people need to realize it would take YEARS! to rebuild the game for multiplayer because its currently built for single player. and they said they may release another version of the game kinda like dont starve with friends but only after the full release. and only maybe but another topic i see people blaming and shaming the devs over is performance and bugs. ITS A PRE RELEASE PROGRAM! c'mon people games are always bound to run into issues at some point. especially ones in development and theres no need to attack the creators they understand you may be angry or annoyed. but there trying they really are so please just dont be so aggressive towards them there job is already hard enough. Feel free to leave your opinion below. Thanks!
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Expect this thread to take a nose dive and then be closed.
Taboo subject? what did i say that was forbidden?
Nothing was Taboo, but Davey might be referring to the Multiplayer thing, which has been brought up way too many times and the discussions have been closed.
Oh... yeah now that makes sense
Sure some of those threads are quite unproductive and with the consistency of multiplayer threads popping up, they are indeed dealt with using a short post and eventually a lock.
But this forum still is for discussion. And with discussion comes the stuff you don't want to hear as well, which should still be allowed. Within reason and the rules of the forum of course. Basically what you said is a partial summary of the forum policies and rules of conduct
Yeah, it's in early access, it's pre-release... that's exactly why people are concerned. So, you know, those concerns are dealt with. That's the whole point.
Early access is specifically for addressing complaints/issues/bugs in the hope that what ever issue is fixed/mitigated before 1.0 release.
As long as complaints etc. are presented and addressed respectfully they should be more than welcome. (If not, then fine, they're just being obstructive and not helpful.) Otherwise what the hell are we doing here?
Criticism should always be welcome if you hope to improve anything.
I can agree with that im just talking about the overly aggressive comments and threads but yes Criticism is fine in my book
i totally agree because the devs would not know what to fix and chase after other wise
Well we do have the:
Plays marines, can't kill aliens, blames aliens for being overpowered
Plays aliens, can't kill marines, blames marines for being overpowered
1. This is the internet - there are always going to be... undesirables we'll call them - the people that can't help but ruin the online dialogue with inexplicable ignorance and/or rage.
2. Sometimes the people who express their opinions inappropriately nonetheless have a good point.
3. The devs know about #1 & #2. They are not dumb - they fully expect to get the undesirables as well as sane human beings, because they know that this is the internet and avoiding them is basically impossible. And they are capable of parsing the useful bits from the foaming rage spittle filled rants if there are any to be found. That isn't to say that the behavior is acceptable, but try not to let it get to you.
Yeah. Git Gud!!
Russian bias.
I'm terribly sorry, sir
I speak, of course, of Mass Effect: Andromeda. The game that's been chewing up all my free time since release day.
I think we can all agree that Bioware qualifies as a AAA-level production and development house. They have a reputation to defend and, let's be honest, a cash cow IP to maintain. Given their resources and budget, there's no defensible reason for underperformance.
And yet, even in its current Early Access state, Subnautica kicks the ever lovin' ass off ME:A.
In the days I've been playing on XB1 (because my potato-powered laptop can't handle it), I've had no fewer than four CTDs. Missing textures almost all the time and even entirely missing actors (meaning that in a shooter, I have things shooting at me that I can't see, making fighting back mighty interesting). Dialogue errors. Infinite loops. State update failures. Basic, Graphics 101 animation errors, like characters' entire arms just clipping right through a body, someone's head doing a couple 360s, or characters defaulting to basic stance (that standing up, arms out to the sides pose artists use) and just kinda hovering around the map. Pop-ins that cause me to get stuck in the map geometry. Sure, some of these are cosmetic problems (serious cosmetic problems, but cosmetic), but others are game-breaking bugs that require a reset and a lot of hope to clear. In many ways, it feels like an unfinished beta.
This from a development house with 800 employees, and subsidiary of a four-plus BILLION dollar parent company (EA).
Then, over here, we have UWE. Twenty people giving a game their all. And you know what? Doing a lot better. Yes, granted, Subnautica still has some rough edges and bugs to fix, some graphics anomalies that haven't quite been ironed out. Some balance issues that need a little tweaking. But it's playable, stable, and frickin' gorgeous. It works. Yes, it's still a beta (you can dress up a beta however you like, call it "early access," but it's still a beta), but it's a damn fine beta. Still a little ground to cover, but if it were released today, it would still show a higher level of production value than a multibillion dollar company put together.
And @EnglishInfidel is right: the strength of Early Access is that developers essentially get a playtest group thousands strong. If problems aren't brought to them, they may go unnoticed and end up in the V1.0 release, and that's not good. So long as we maintain a respectful and productive means of highlighting issues, the system works well. It's when we devolve into petty complaining and arguments about issues long since dead and sealed (like the infernal multiplayer threads) that the system breaks down. No, Early Access is not an excuse for major glitches like objects disappearing, mobs appearing where they shouldn't, or any number of other faults. It is, however, an acceptable explanation for why certain tasks which happen at the end of the production process, like code optimization, haven't happened yet.
Sure, the door's closed for new ideas for now; it's all about the V1.0 release, and that's fine. We can still keep bringing ideas up, prove that there's more ground that can be covered and strong interest in it. And we can and should bring problems and issues up, because that's how they get fixed. But we must do it like civilized human beings. Yes, the internet is largely a mess of uncivilized screaming and finger pointing, but that's no excuse. The burden of keeping this little corner of the internet civil and productive is ours to bear.
(Like, the whole 'Well Bioware delegated the game to a subteam that's never actually done a full game on their own is an explanation, not an excuse, and one followed by 'Bioware probably shouldn't have pushed a new game for one of their flagship IPs onto their C-team')
OT: So, yeah, I dunno if I'd call the majority of the negative posts 'shaming the devs'. Worst I'd say is a bit hyperbolic. I mean, sure, there's people who spout things like "No MP no guns 0/10 this game will die" but they're in the minority. Mosts of the critiques I've seen here have been like "Each time I try to scan a Seamoth fragment my game implodes", which is KIND OF what you need to report to make sure the game is in good shape come full release.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here @phantomfinch and guess you play War Thunder?
I don't think we should give the devs too much leeway to the point where it turns into absolute obedient loyalty. We lose our power as consumers at that point. And I think that leads to a bad game generally.
That is why I am hesitant with the intentions of saying, "They're working as hard as they can" and "Give them a break" or so on. A reasonable consumer will expect the quality product that the resources given can produce. But that doesn't mean I can't give them hell over things that I think will be an issue for me in the long run of things.
Like my opinion on the game's difficulty, or lack thereof.
Which is why I think it does more harm than good to become not just attached to a product, but loyal to it. You don't see what others would otherwise be able to; you have a bias. And thus the game may suffer as a result, especially if they take into consideration only those on this forum; usually the people here are here for two reasons; to complain about unreasonable things, or to express their joy for the game or ideas.
That's just my opinion and observation. Fair enough, devs are working hard, but as a consumer that is of no concern to me. I want the product that the resources they have call for; whether or not they work hard is irrelevant to me if the product is of a lower quality than I expect.
Just take a look at Mass Effect: Andromeda. The game, from what I heard, isn't completely horrible, but given the resources, money, and power behind the game with 5+ years of work, a lot of the mediocre to low quality effort and glitches that still made it in the game are unacceptable to most people. With the AAA standard that game will be put to the fire comparatively. Anyone who, given these circumstances, accepts the game for what it is... fair enough, you do you. But don't tell me I should accept it with your "objective lens" and "see the game as it is". If I do that I leave myself vulnerable to games that are cut short of quality to sell. Using that excuse is ironically making your defense less objective. Take into consideration the resources put into the game, and expect a particular quality in return.
With a game like Subnautica, I should put it to the fire when it falls short of the quality I KNOW the team is capable of. That's why I'm so hard on the Dev team for difficulty. I know they are capable of balancing the game out so that it's fun to explore and survive in.
It seems to me like the Consumers of the Gaming Industry are blamed for what goes wrong a lot of the times. Sick of that. So no I won't stop shaming the Devs if they shame is reasonable. In fact, you should be glad if I do that with a transparent team. It gives them more opportunities to satisfy the consumer. Criticism can do a lot of good. Just take a look at Titanfall 2 compared to the original Titanfall.
So um... UWE is pants, is what I'm sayin'
/me hides
I think I speak for...all of us, actually, when I say:
"PLEASE for the love of Peepers, give @Kouji_San pants! Things are getting weird in the forum lobby. And kinda awkward. Guy with a ski mask, a knife, suit jacket, and no pants...it's not setting a great tone."
Also, im starting to doubt the degree of cleanliness of his underwears ''pinch nose''
<span style="color:dimgrey;font-size:4pt">Stop Shaming The Kouji</span>
not trying to be a prick, but
They're trying their hardest to make a great game and make every one happy. but they're just people and they're trying to make a fun amazing experience but they will try to do everything they can in their power to make every one happy. but there are some things they just cant do though such as multiplayer.
Not trying to be a prick, fellow Grammar Nazi, but...
Capitalise that N and use punctuation!
It won't happen again, Sir!
Na I'm not a fan of HP bars.
Same goes for BF1, which is so far removed from historical accuracy it's not even funny. But weirdly the thing pissing me off the most is that female computerized bitching Betty along with the short short range "sniping" and people posting videos about how gud they are, pathetic 50meter shots
Come back when you shoot someone over 400m with a crappy Arisaka type 99 or heck, let's just use the older yet more accurate WW1 era Lee Enfield No.4 Mk 1
Forgotten Hope a BF1942 mod is still the best complete WW2 war game to date, but it is outdated in terms of looks, which is sad because it is a game with such a good skill floor and also so much depth and content! And with complete I mean all countries and army/navy/airforce units and proper ballistics and armor deflection values! It's not too simlike and not too arcady. It's just in that sweet spot where a game should be! It's basically what BF1942 should've been from the start...
The same goes for Battlefield 1918...
It's just a sad display that, with all this new tech, all they did was improve the visuals to super sexy mode. BUT!!! Completely fuck up the gameplay and depth. BF series has started to go more and more into arcady run and jump infantry combat with a few vehicles thrown into the mix. Friggin' shallow games, I wold love to see a new FH on the newest BF engine and show Dice and EA how you should make a game
FH2 just doesn't do it for me either, with that buggy/laggy BF2 engine
War thunder is a pretty accurate ww2 sim.
The Germans are slow but have some of the best guns (in fact the only tanks that can stand up to them were developed during the Cold War)
The British are..... there
The American are fast
The soviets have thick armour and are bias as fuk
And the Japanese are target practice.
It features tanks, planes and soon to have naval combat as well.