DB is dying because of it's developers are suffocating it

(Nail) #21

don’t like the game being called beta, go play something else
want maps ? download UDK and make some, I posted the unit specs long time ago

@Ardez that’s June 2015, you have 2016

(Ardez1) #22

@Nail Thanks! Fixed!

(gg2ez) #23

I cannot stress enough about how important this is. SD isn’t doing this anywhere near enough and whenever they do, they either go overboard with the feedback or completely misinterpret it.

What we need is a serious player base to developer discussion regarding DB because every now and then, sh*t hits the fan.

(CCP115) #24

I agree that player input is needed, but uhh, might wanna slow it down a bit.

First, let SD finish with their current mercs and maps in development. Once they have that down, I feel as if the game will be in a full release state.

When that’s done? Then release a map SDK, and maybe work on even more in the way of SDK content.

Add in Steam Workshop map support, and allow people to rent servers. Keep adding in content, and also do the occasional Valve and just add in some of the best community maps as official maps.

But for now? Just wait a bit. We don’t even have all the mercs.

(gg2ez) #25

Well maybe we’d have the mercs already if SD weren’t busy screwing around with stupid bullshit that no one asked for, i.e. removing same-merc trade-ups.

The fact that we don’t have all the mercs doesn’t at all justify SD’s headless-chicken behaviour as-of-late.

(bontsa) #26

Do keep in mind though that the game is developed by SplashDamage, published (servers, customer support etc.) by Nexon. Being very quiet and apparently non-willing for the time being towards server rental and map SDK might be something which isn’t only under developers decision, sadly.

(XavienX) #27

This spoke to me on a deep level.

(Jostabeere) #28

What really grinds my gears is not the fact how much people speak about things, but how well the publishers/devs ignore said things.
For example the sheer mass of Phantom threads. Or threads with suggestions like trading. Or The WtD Event.
Clans.
Or the community survey.
It is clear enough what people want.
Why not putting down what they want back and concentrate on things that people want in the first line and say: “Yes, we fucked up, sorry. We will do it first, be a bit patient. We will do the changes you want the most”

(bontsa) #29

[quote=“Jostabeere;147471”]
Why not putting down what they want back and concentrate on things that people want in the first line and say: “Yes, we fucked up, sorry. We will do it first, be a bit patient. We will do the changes you want the most”[/quote]

While I agree a lot in transparency you’re asking for in this post overall, thankfully they’re getting towards that slowly. And there are things neither devs nor publisher can’t really say to implement right away before dealing with some other stuff first.

For example, map SDK might have some un-fancy copyright bollocky goofery with for example Nexon policies. If people start for example re-creating cs:go maps into DB, dev/publisher might get into some trouble if not handled correctly. No idea, dunno how Valve and other devs deal with this, it’s definitely doable as we see though.

And why to release map SDK if people would have extremely tedious path in order to get their maps played on official servers? I feel server rental would have to come in first before that, or some other convenient way of adding the community maps. So if they answer “ye, we’re working towards SDK now” and run into issue like so and have to postpone it, the ourcry is again massive even if they clearly admitted they screwed it.

Hence I understand completely they’re somewhat vague on what comes out and when. Blaming the community reactions overall here, wouldn’t want to be on receiving end of all this whine with cheese going around all aboard the forums.

But ye, SD/Nexon both need to understand they’re advertising a “competitive to the core” class based, objective focused f2p shooter. There should be more reacting to issues community sees important. They should be willing to try out more changes while still in Beta, for example buffing Phantom for only a week with things X and Y might be enough to see if said change was good or not. Then revert if next week if it was bad. And redo something couple weeks later, for only a week for starters. That’s least how I see Beta should work.

And gosh damnit already with the “getting money of it” meaning stuff is not suspectible for change anymore- arguement. Ditch that already dear devs, or is organizatory side of both developer and publisher so greedy they want to milk all they still can and sticking with sucky systems.

(MarsRover) #30

I’m not getting that impression since joining the community around July 2015. Sure, there were some flashes of transparency but they were few and far between. Not enough to establish a trend.

[quote=“bontsa;147484”]For example, map SDK might have some un-fancy copyright bollocky goofery with for example Nexon policies. If people start for example re-creating cs:go maps into DB, dev/publisher might get into some trouble if not handled correctly. No idea, dunno how Valve and other devs deal with this, it’s definitely doable as we see though.

And why to release map SDK if people would have extremely tedious path in order to get their maps played on official servers? I feel server rental would have to come in first before that, or some other convenient way of adding the community maps. So if they answer “ye, we’re working towards SDK now” and run into issue like so and have to postpone it, the ourcry is again massive even if they clearly admitted they screwed it. [/quote]
That’s a non-issue since servers will always be under SD/Nexon control, even rentals. Maps will need to be vetted.

Right now they can’t even filter weapon stats by playtime/performance/etc. So stats will be useless, all that’s left is subjective player opinions and it’s not easy to base balancing solely on that. Which is a shame, as I completely agree with you. The other alternative is a limited public test realm where people go only intentionally, as that feedback should be of better quality.

IMO they have a point here. But it’s 100% their fault we’re in this situation so while I understand, I have no sympathy.

(bontsa) #31

I’m not getting that impression since joining the community around July 2015. Sure, there were some flashes of transparency but they were few and far between. Not enough to establish a trend.[/quote]

I joined around the same time, we agree to disagree on this I guess. Overall the communication has so far been “flashy” with streams etc. I recall only like 1 or 2 Q&A moments with devs? Both within what, 3 months or so. I think there’s a pattern, albeit too slow for the current sitation. Transparency started to be advertised too only about couple months ago or so, hence I take that milestone as my starting point instead for my arguement of seeing increasing interaction with community.

[quote=“MarsRover;147497”][quote=“bontsa;147484”]For example, map SDK might have some un-fancy copyright bollocky goofery with for example Nexon policies. If people start for example re-creating cs:go maps into DB, dev/publisher might get into some trouble if not handled correctly. No idea, dunno how Valve and other devs deal with this, it’s definitely doable as we see though.

And why to release map SDK if people would have extremely tedious path in order to get their maps played on official servers? I feel server rental would have to come in first before that, or some other convenient way of adding the community maps. So if they answer “ye, we’re working towards SDK now” and run into issue like so and have to postpone it, the ourcry is again massive even if they clearly admitted they screwed it. [/quote]
That’s a non-issue since servers will always be under SD/Nexon control, even rentals. Maps will need to be vetted.[/quote]

Good point. I was more referring to that exact vetting process as it requires quite a work from publisher side I imagine, which would alienate them away from community maps. In titles like TF2 etc. peeps can “vet” their maps to their own community servers with simple, 5minute discussion of “Oh, this looks fancy, lets give it a try and feedback the creator!”. Obviously vetting from dev/publish side would have to be done eventually, but by then community would’ve polished most roughest edges off already. Sieving process, so to speak could be less demanding though meaning maps would be allowed to enter pool more easily and checked with playtesting, but we already see both SD/Nexon are unwilling to leave less-than-finished maps to roam the pool, as testing of new maps is done in weekend bursts. So it’s the balancing between having as finished as possible maps in pool with vigorous, time consuming testing against allowing less finished ones to be tested with a word of warning.

Right now they can’t even filter weapon stats by playtime/performance/etc. So stats will be useless, all that’s left is subjective player opinions and it’s not easy to base balancing solely on that. Which is a shame, as I completely agree with you. The other alternative is a limited public test realm where people go only intentionally, as that feedback should be of better quality. [/quote]

Yep, that test realm has been in developer wish-list apparently for oh so long. We desperately need that, agreed, and we need that yesterday.

As for subjective feel changes, if staying short-term I personally see no issue with them, as long as they’re advertised as short-term testings. Fail faster- mindset, figuring as fast as possible what doesn’t work and being done with it, not wasting time on thinking it for months internally and then noticing it wasn’t so good idea after all once it hits major public testing.

IMO they have a point here. But it’s 100% their fault we’re in this situation so while I understand, I have no sympathy.[/quote]

There is a point, can’t deny that. I think the opposing point of “spend money on Beta product on your own responsibility, helping towards development” has upper hand however, nothing should be locked down.

I should get my coffee, my thoughts wander like the lenghts of these posts.

(FalC_16) #32

If you look at today’s world of gaming, majority of the developers are focusing on publishing titles every year in order to make shitload of money in a very short time. Every year! Game like Battlefront or The Division would be amazing titles, but they lack content.

Lack of content is a cancer to all games. It’ll consume them until they die. Even though they have a great potential. Battlefront is a very nice example. That game could have been a masterpiece. In the end it’s a nice pile of shit with state of the art graphics and sound effects. Ok those are large game developers who are truly pushed to the limit by the likes of EA. Again why? Monieees…expensive DLC season passes BS is another symptom of cancer in gaming industry. Moving on to the f2p concept there are many games with huge potential such as DB.

Now I assume that SD is a smaller developer who takes time to make new content. Obviously there is no game publisher pushing SD to roll out new stuff. Yet they focus on adding new mercs and tweaking things that are lower priority. Burning issues are very explicitly described on forums and yet they look into other things. This is really beyond me and especially knowing, that Dirty Bomb has such a great potential. The game completely consumed me, but I feel like they should make more new maps and add content to the game to assure longevity. By adding content I am not saying we need more mercs, not for now at least.

I am positive and hope that DB won’t die as it’s predecessors.

(SiegeFace) #33

@FalC_16 They are working on two new maps right now, Gallery (Exe) & Dockyard (Obj/SW), both of which seem pretty damn cool from what little I played during the blockout test weekend thingy.

All we can do is wait, they appear to be in the mood for squashing bugs and tweaking things, I’m sure most of development is going towards them maps, then maybe after mercs/other content, I know there desire to push ranked mode (which would be a godsend if they could just get the ball rolling with the whole season thing) and we have 2 confirmed mercs without a release date.

I hope they continue to add more maps/modes and or other content after the game has come out of beta, it will help to keep the game fresh and alive.

(FalC_16) #34

@SiegeFace Yes I am aware of the 2 new maps plus some 2 more mercs in the pipeline. However the maps are being born very slowly. Another point is, vast group in the community does not like execution. So why not to focus on objective instead? That is the core game mode for DB no?

SD should really rethink their strategy in terms of prioritization and perhaps listen more to their community and engage it.

(Sinfulsebastian) #35

[quote=“SiegeFace;147609”]@FalC_16 They are working on two new maps right now, Gallery (Exe) & Dockyard (Obj/SW), both of which seem pretty damn cool from what little I played during the blockout test weekend thingy.

All we can do is wait, they appear to be in the mood for squashing bugs and tweaking things, I’m sure most of development is going towards them maps, then maybe after mercs/other content, I know there desire to push ranked mode (which would be a godsend if they could just get the ball rolling with the whole season thing) and we have 2 confirmed mercs without a release date.

I hope they continue to add more maps/modes and or other content after the game has come out of beta, it will help to keep the game fresh and alive.[/quote]

Dockyard is pretty bad tbh, no balance whatsoever. Can’t speak for gallery, execution isn’t a good gamemode.

(iNFERNOh) #36

They should just fix the old bugs (missions not renewing, servers crashing, can’t shoot for a while after trying to shoot just after using an ability, stoker molotov and kira laser disappearing). These are just some I can remember right now.

EDIT: martyrdom doing no damage, healthpacks diving to the ground, game still connecting to the server when hitting cancel on server browser