Aren't the devs focusing on the wrong things?

(Ctrix) #21

Beta at this point is a marketing term for pre-release. It has little other meaning. But yet people remember that once it meant something regarding the developing stage of software and thus come expectations. I’m just telling you that according to software development lingo, this game is in Alpha stage, and not Beta. Regardless what the marketing team tells you.

(Enzo) #22

@Ctrix

So I’m to take your take on the stage of development of this game and ignore their marketing team. Fine I’ll do that.

Hell of a great marketing team they have. Wonder if there’s an opening.

How many years has this game been around if I might ask?

I started playing a few months ago.

I thought the Founder Cards were for the alpha stage. If you’re technically still in Alpha I want a Founder Cards.

Maybe your marketing team could make something up and have me get one. You know since they’re so good at it.

(Grave_Knight) #23

The people that handle matchmaking, and the people who handle map balancing, are not the same people who handle mercs. Different teams for different jobs.

(Enzo) #24

@“Grave Knight”

I thought that’s the reason companies set up group meetings to get everyone on the same page. Guess everyone in this company works like cowboys.

Also it means their very competent at what their doing since delegating work get’s such brilliant updates.

All I have to say is keep it up :wink:

(Nail) #25

I started playing Jan 2013 as an Alpha, pre Nexon

(Lumi) #26

In my humble opinion, this game should have stayed in closed Beta until all mercs and major features were released. They could have sent out multiple more waves of invites or keys to gradually increase the player base, but going to open beta was one of the worst things that happened to this game.

The game was at its best during closed beta and it has never gone back to that state. Why? Because people playing DB at the closed beta time were people genuinely interested in the game. Not just people who join, lured by a free2play entry fee. It would also kept the game protected of the first opinion effect that many people got when joining the game during the open beta release and that left due to various reasons (poor content, bugs, etc.) to never come back. Finishing the game’s content while removing bugs in closed beta would have released the game in open beta in a much more polished state, certainly this way retaining more players than it did.

I’ve also considered many times, and I still believe that DB would have potential to be a payable triple A style game, where you pay 50 euros to acquire the game, but have no in-game transactions (of course the loadout system would have to be rethought). It would limit the amount of half hearted players filling the community. Now some say that DB wouldn’t have thrived as well without the free player base, but I say it has enough to offer to be a payable game.

(Jostabeere) #27

At best it’s “the publisher is making the devs do weird things, as well as repeating old errors that the industry learned from years ago”.[/quote]

It’s more like some people who has 0 clue about game design seem to know more than splash damage.

(Grave_Knight) #28

I’m with Jostabeere with this one. Actually read your OP and honestly, you should like a shitty gamer elitist that knows 0 things about game design (or game design philosophy) and just want the game to placate your tastes.

What’s funny, the jump you cite in Dome, is actually the most worthless jump on the map.

And I really don’t remember anyone ever saying they’re designing the game to be more competitive. Competitive play is one of the elements of the game, and a huge influence on balance changes, but game designers who design games only for comp doom themselves. Take for example, the most extreme hardcore gamer MMO ever, Wildstar…yeah…let’s just say there is a reason why they moved from a subscription based model to F2P. Compare that to Super Casual Game of the Century World of Warcraft (even with a dwindling population it still out sales any other MMO and it’s more than 10 years old).

(Runeforce) #29

Lies! It was pre-alpha. (And in late November, early December 2012, if I remember correct.)

(yenku) #30

After reading you all I feel like I should quit this game asap, and I wouldn’t like this because I have fun, not always, playing it.

Noobs might be an “issue” because, we all want good quality matches and often this does not happen, and is normal where there are inexperienced players on field. Ok, do something to force new players understand how this game should be played.

The competitive scene, might not be essential but some players like this part of the game and, imho, should get pushed a little bit more. (Sorry for my English)

Alpha or Beta, I would like to hear from Developers, clearly and crystal clear, what their roadmap is and how they want this game to be in final stage.
Sometimes just the “Stay tuned” isn’t enough.

We as players and beta tester, at this point, might be right or wrong with our opinions but sure we always say exactly what we think.

(Jostabeere) #31

[quote=“flease;113742”]After reading you all I feel like I should quit this game asap, and I wouldn’t like this because I have fun, not always, playing it.

Noobs might be an “issue” because, we all want good quality matches and often this does not happen, and is normal where there are inexperienced players on field. Ok, do something to force new players understand how this game should be played.

[/quote]
This is honestly one of the dumbest and arrogant things I’ve read here.
Just because someone is bad, doesn’t mean he didn’t understand the game.
DB has a learning curve AFTER you got the basics. (killing, healing, objectives)
And this “how the game should be played”, you wrote should be “how I want people to play this game”, right? The sooner you understand that different people play different, the better your games become.

(yenku) #32

[quote=“Jostabeere;113750”][quote=“flease;113742”]After reading you all I feel like I should quit this game asap, and I wouldn’t like this because I have fun, not always, playing it.

Noobs might be an “issue” because, we all want good quality matches and often this does not happen, and is normal where there are inexperienced players on field. Ok, do something to force new players understand how this game should be played.

[/quote]
This is honestly one of the dumbest and arrogant things I’ve read here.
Just because someone is bad, doesn’t mean he didn’t understand the game.
DB has a learning curve AFTER you got the basics. (killing, healing, objectives)
And this “how the game should be played”, you wrote should be “how I want people to play this game”, right? The sooner you understand that different people play different, the better your games become.[/quote]

I’m sorry you understood what I said this way. Not your fault, just my English is bad and I’ve not been able to explain better myself.
Didn’t want to offend new players, because I’m still a new player.
Didn’t want to tell other what to do. I’m not that guy and, again, I’m sorry if what I wrote made me sound arrogant.
I’m neither arrogant nor stupid.

(Captain_Forward) #33

Kinda funny to read “make this game more competitive”, because it makes zero sense. You can’t force people to create teams and fight eachother in a tournament, nor you can’t pleasure everyone with balance changes. Especially in a such picky community.

For example, TF2 community. Valve don’t give a fuck about competitive scene, all what they do is adding wearable in-game medals for participants and, of course, winners. People by themselves organise tournaments, create and change rules, judge and comment matches. Valve wasn’t interested in people’s opinion in balance changes either (with only one exeption, and only because of matchmaking incoming). Yet this is a great game, it is free to play, and it is in a 3rd position by current player count most of the time.

(3N1GM4) #34

[quote=“Jostabeere;113750”][quote=“flease;113742”]After reading you all I feel like I should quit this game asap, and I wouldn’t like this because I have fun, not always, playing it.

Noobs might be an “issue” because, we all want good quality matches and often this does not happen, and is normal where there are inexperienced players on field. Ok, do something to force new players understand how this game should be played.

[/quote]
This is honestly one of the dumbest and arrogant things I’ve read here.
Just because someone is bad, doesn’t mean he didn’t understand the game.
DB has a learning curve AFTER you got the basics. (killing, healing, objectives)
And this “how the game should be played”, you wrote should be “how I want people to play this game”, right? The sooner you understand that different people play different, the better your games become.[/quote]

I think he was trying to say that they should have a better tutorial or in game notifications so people understand the concept and gameplay of each game type. Say… only one person can repair or defuse. That you need to be carrying the bomb to plant it. And that side objectives can help your team move more quickly through the map. That generators can be destroyed by explosions and gunfire as well as the c4.

Core gameplay mechanics that aren’t “fps” traits.

I’m pretty sure you both feel the same way on the subject, just his phrasing (not blaming you flease) isn’t the best.

(Amerika) #35

I work in software development for a living and according to me you’re incorrect. We have beta programs that some of our customers participate in with our software and they know full well that there might have issues and that not all of the features will be in or even fully fleshed out. They know this and choose to use the software anyway. Our Alpha software is more proof of concept to get a good idea of what we want the more finished product to be and the features we will need to implement.

Dirty Bomb is definitely a game in beta regardless of what certain people with entitlement issues believe.

(3N1GM4) #36

I work in software development for a living and according to me you’re incorrect. We have beta programs that some of our customers participate in with our software and they know full well that we might have issues and that not all of the features are or are not fully fleshed out. They know this and choose to use the software anyway. Our Alpha software is more proof of concept to get a good idea of what we want the more finished product to be and the features we will need to implement.

Dirty Bomb is definitely a game in beta regardless of what certain people with entitlement issues believe.[/quote]

While true in software development, in game development / marketing, it has been hijacked as a pre-release trial and hype generator by the AAA developers/publishers. They have such a large internal QA, and payed play testers that by the time the public gets their hand on a “beta” its generally 99.9% a completed product. Just look at all the recent beta releases for COD, BF, etc. Generally the product that ships is nearly identical to the beta, bugs and all. You sometimes get a day0 patch but thats pretty rare.

Its merely a way to get gameplay video into twitch streams, youtube, reviewers, etc.

(Amerika) #37

I work in software development for a living and according to me you’re incorrect. We have beta programs that some of our customers participate in with our software and they know full well that we might have issues and that not all of the features are or are not fully fleshed out. They know this and choose to use the software anyway. Our Alpha software is more proof of concept to get a good idea of what we want the more finished product to be and the features we will need to implement.

Dirty Bomb is definitely a game in beta regardless of what certain people with entitlement issues believe.[/quote]

While true in software development, in game development / marketing, it has been hijacked as a pre-release trial and hype generator by the AAA developers/publishers. They have such a large internal QA, and payed play testers that by the time the public gets their hand on a “beta” its generally 99.9% a completed product. Just look at all the recent beta releases for COD, BF, etc. Generally the product that ships is nearly identical to the beta, bugs and all. You sometimes get a day0 patch but thats pretty rare.

Its merely a way to get gameplay video into twitch streams, youtube, reviewers, etc.[/quote]

It’s used as a way to get money out of a product earlier than you’d expect because people want the product. All while also getting quality feedback as you build out new features. That’s how we use it. Sound familiar?

I get that it’s become morally questionable how some companies treat betas, mostly due to Steam’s horrid Green Light system, which lets companies get away with murder. But DB is a proper beta and being done in the way that betas are supposed to be done.

If DB was a cash grab that didn’t have constant balance updates, content updates and new features I’d be onboard with calling it a morally reprehensible product that abuses the beta tag. But it’s not. They have provided the community with tons of information and updated consistently for almost a year now since the move to Steam.

Assigning labels without understanding what something actually is and tossing them all into the same barrel as if there is no difference is just weird to me.

(3N1GM4) #38

I agree completely. DB is a proper beta product. I was merely stating what the “general gamer” has come to believe beta means.

(Nail) #39

Lies! It was pre-alpha. (And in late November, early December 2012, if I remember correct.)[/quote]

I got invited Nov 2012, but didn’t start playing until Jan, had a couple surgeries in Nov, Dec

(Gung-ho) #40

DB is definitely in the beta phase - SD would have builds that have all mercs however that is kept internally for the time being (remember that the closed beta had the yet to be released mercs).

Using SC2 as an example has some validity - SC2 was for a time the champion of competitive gaming however LoL and Dota 2 took that crown (note both F2P). Also remember that LoL took the crown from SC2 and then the more competitive game Dota 2 took the crown from LoL.

What were SC2’s mistakes? I would put it down to four primary reasons.

  1. Solo game - SC2 was a solo game and usually team games are more successful. Yes SC2 could be team based but that was never the major consideration. To an extent this was something out of Blizzard’s control.

  2. Skill and knowledge cap insanity. DB’s skill/knowledge cap has nothing on SC2’s. The newest SC2 expansion has tried to address this by making the game a bit more simple.

  3. Marketing - LoL and Dota 2 basically marketed their competitive gaming scene better than SC2. This is where Riot and Valve truly succeeded and Blizzard failed miserably. Even Blizzard’s moba entry HotS has been off to a rocky start but after putting on a few events and pushing the game as a real competitive alternative the HotS player base has supposedly been improving.

  4. Development time - When SC2 came out the impression they gave were the expansions were going to be coming out year after year - not nearly 3 years after each other.

Now point 1 is not applicable to DB - it is a team game. I would have preferred it as 6 v 6 as that’s how I’ve played other SD games (W:ET, ETQW and Brink).

Point 2 - DB has a higher skill cap than other FPS games. Higher but nothing insane and overall lower than Dota 2 but they are different styles of games so direct comparison is a little difficult.

Point 3 - What marketing? As an aussie I’ve only seen DB marketed to existing DB players.

Point 4 - DB is taking longer to develop than it should from my perspective.

To me DB’s problem really is points 3 and 4; particularly point 3.