It'll be interesting to see

(Melinder) #21

@GatoCommodore said:
Thats why we have Representative (PTS players) to discuss the laws to enact
PTS players shouldnt be elected by the majority because sometimes there will be people that dont know what they are doing but they dictate the law.

PTS players should be elected by the people (reasonable candidates, of course, with evidence that proves they’re qualified), as we are entrusting in them to make the right decisions for the game - our representatives if you will. Let’s face it, SD don’t know who does and doesn’t have the proper set of skills to analyse these kinds of things, only we know who is, because we spend every day gaming with each other.

(Eox) #22

@Melinder said:

@stayfreshshoe said:

@Melinder said:

@GatoCommodore said:
I THOUGHT PEOPLE IN PTS ARE PROFESSIONALS OR SOMETHING…

It was established a hell of a long time ago that the PTS isn’t and never was used for properly testing updates. It was always for Content Creators to prepare content prior to the update going live. SD would never listen to anything anybody says.

This is just not true. The PTS are asked to test specific features or updates and contains a variety of players from different backgrounds. The whole idea that the PTS purely consists of content creators or straight up incorrect and is a mentality that is negative not only for the PTS but for the game on the whole.

The PTS does include content creators as they need access to unreleased content. If they did not have acces they would not be able to make videos ahead of time.

We listen to what our PTS players say. Often there will be disagreements and discussions then take place, we encourage this behaviour. If you’re not involved int he PTS process, you aren’t privy to the goings on and this alone makes it unfair to comment or make assumptions.

There’s a lie somewhere in there, because there’s no way these terrible balance updates get through testing without you ignoring absolutely all feedback, or your test team being completely braindead. I’ll leave it to you to decide which of those is true.

There is no lie. Believe it or not, players in the PTS do play a major role in every single updates, playtesting stuff heavily and suggesting most of the changes. The lastest balance update mostly contained suggestions from the PTS. I explained the same thing in another thread. You might have missed it. You can find that post here : http://forums.dirtybomb.com/discussion/comment/250088#Comment_250088

(doxjq) #23

“The veteran’s feedback is not the only thing that matters. Casual sentiment is an equally strong thing” lmao. Really? This alone explains how the latest balance patch is so fucked up and why so many people quit over it. If a level 5 newbie who hasn’t even used all the weapons in the game has an equal say on how they should be balanced then I’m lost for words.

I did have a lol @ the part about burst rifles though. Yes they were OP. Yes they did have an awfully quick TTK. Please explain why the addition of horizontal recoil was the answer. Seriously. Why was nerfing their damage not a better solution? How is adding randomness and inconsistency to a weapon a good way to balance it. It honestly sounds like whoever had the final say here is completely incompetent.

I can’t imagine a single competitive player saying they feel horizontal recoil is a good way to balance the burst rifles or any weapon for that matter. Many people have asked on the forums how horizontal recoil even came about. No one has ever asked for this. Every time it’s been brought up since the update though, it’s been ignored.

(doxjq) #24

For reference @Eox the last paragraph in my last post is in reference to what @Melinder said. “there’s no way these terrible balance updates get through testing without you ignoring absolutely all feedback, or your test team being completely braindead.”

I’m sorry but I agree with Melinder. I struggle to imagine a single person asking for horizontal recoil in the PTS. Even if there is one, I struggle to see multiple people asking for it. I also don’t believe it was heavily play tested and that people actually tested the weapons in their current state and said “Yep, this feels great” and gave it the thumbs up to hit the live servers.

There’s just no way, I refuse to believe it. @Melinder is right. Feedback was either ignored or the people in the PTS saying these changes are good are 100% incompetent. Either that, or I suspect the live version we are playing right now was not actually tested in the PTS. What scares me even more is that SD themselves apparently think this was a good idea.

I honestly wouldn’t even be surprised if some people gave feedback on the changes without even testing them, because I have personal friends who said “awesome” when they read about the changes to burst rifles but after actually playing with them they couldn’t believe how poor the changes actually felt and how inconsistent the weapons now were.

(GatoCommodore) #25

@Melinder said:

@GatoCommodore said:
Thats why we have Representative (PTS players) to discuss the laws to enact
PTS players shouldnt be elected by the majority because sometimes there will be people that dont know what they are doing but they dictate the law.

PTS players should be elected by the people (reasonable candidates, of course, with evidence that proves they’re qualified), as we are entrusting in them to make the right decisions for the game - our representatives if you will.

well this works too…
what im thinking is youtubers that are new to the game but has few thousand viewers could get elected because they have a bigger number of supporters…

(Melinder) #26

I have no issue with Content Creators being apart of the PTS, provided that they are there strictly to experience the changes early to prepare their videos prior to release. As soon as you give them a voice in balance matters, you lose competitive integrity. If said Content Creator is solidified in the game as a good player, then by all means, give them a voice in the matter.

(Meerkats) #27

Whenever I hear anything about PTS this and PTS that, I am immediately reminded of this quote from bash.org.

For those of you too lazy to take the jump:

#240849
Patrician|Away> what does your robot do, sam
bovril> it collects data about the surrounding environment, then discards it and drives into walls

I’m certain @neverplayseriou and @kittz0r would agree. Ripperonis you two.

(Teflon Love) #28

@Meerkats said:
Whenever I hear anything about PTS this and PTS that, I am immediately reminded of this quote from bash.org.

The amount of data you get from PTS is very small, so it’s kind of hard to make an informed decision from that. Sure, if a lot of players of different archetypes complain about something, it probably indicates that something is wrong. But improving it still involves a lot of guess work, so at some point you just have to throw your idea at the large crowd of the public servers and see what happens. And sadly, it ain’t always pretty.

Collecting telemetry data is one thing. Interpreting them is a another. And finding a good way to move forward again is an entirely different beast.

As an example how a telemetry analysis might look like see Guns and Guardians: Comparative Cluster Analysis and Behavioral Profiling in Destiny or it’s more accessible but less informative variant at Guns and Guardians: Playstyles in Destiny. Also an interesting read is Behavior Evolution in Tomb Raider Underworld. Yes, it’s an old game, yes, it’s single player and yes, it can’t be compared with DB in any meaningful way. Just focus on what data they collected, how they used them to categorize players and analyze maps, and how this was used to improve the game - and all the work behind it.

Despite all this academic mumbo jumbo it is still very difficult to do anything meaningful with all these data because it’s hard to tell which are actually relevant, and which you forgot to even collect. As a paper on Player Modeling puts it:

In computer games an extensive set of features of player behavior can be extracted and measured. At the same time there is, usually, lack of insight in what these features actually mean, at least at present

I’m not happy either with every decision SD makes concerning game play. But at least I can appreciate the complexity of the topic and I think they deserve better than just links to snide remarks from bash.org.

(GatoCommodore) #29

@DarkangelUK just came and pressed lol at my comment without saying anything

should i be worried?

(GatoCommodore) #30

@DarkangelUK

(FalC_16) #31

It would be interesting to see the composition of PTS. Imo there should be competitive players, casuals, game devs and also newcomers in order to cover feedback from various angles.

I think only then it will be easy to rollout good patches… i love how CTE servers work for BF1. With growing community you can have CTE free far all and not just for a closed group

(Melinder) #32

@FalC_16 said:
It would be interesting to see the composition of PTS.

There’s around 8-10 actual good players, the Content Creators, and the remainder are just a bunch of old players with little skill or relevance.

I trust my sources.

(GatoCommodore) #33

@Melinder said:

@FalC_16 said:
It would be interesting to see the composition of PTS.

There’s around 8-10 actual good players, the Content Creators, and the remainder are just a bunch of old players with little skill or relevance.

I trust my sources.

8-10 out of how many testers?

(Melinder) #34

@GatoCommodore said:
8-10 out of how many testers?

That I can’t answer. All I can say is that they’re the minority.

(doxjq) #35

I’d love to know how long the testers got to test the weapon balance patch before release, because I refuse to believe that the competitive players inside the PTS thought that horizontal recoil was a good idea.

Like I said in another post, I’m damn near positive the live version wasn’t even tested in the PTS, or if it was I’d be inclined to say that it wasn’t there for long and not many people played it.

(Melinder) #36

@doxjq said:
I’d love to know how long the testers got to test the weapon balance patch before release, because I refuse to believe that the competitive players inside the PTS thought that horizontal recoil was a good idea.

Like I said in another post, I’m damn near positive the live version wasn’t even tested in the PTS, or if it was I’d be inclined to say that it wasn’t there for long and not many people played it.

From past experiences alone, I can hazard a guess at a few hours prior, leaving no time for feedback to be taken into consideration, which it likely wouldn’t have been if time was reserved anyway.

(K1X455) #37

@Melinder said:

@doxjq said:
I’d love to know how long the testers got to test the weapon balance patch before release, because I refuse to believe that the competitive players inside the PTS thought that horizontal recoil was a good idea.

Like I said in another post, I’m damn near positive the live version wasn’t even tested in the PTS, or if it was I’d be inclined to say that it wasn’t there for long and not many people played it.

From past experiences alone, I can hazard a guess at a few hours prior, leaving no time for feedback to be taken into consideration, which it likely wouldn’t have been if time was reserved anyway.

some sort of ninja update to eff things up…

tsk tsk…

(bgyoshi) #38

MFW when people act like pros quitting a game, in which they are the clear minority contributors, matters

The casual crowd dominates this game, nobody cares if pros are leaving

If pros are so mad that BRs are bad from horizontal recoil that they’d rather quit instead of just using a different gun, then good riddance. No need for that kind of whiny trash here.

(Unrivaled) #39

@bgyoshi said:
MFW when people act like pros quitting a game, in which they are the clear minority contributors, matters

The casual crowd dominates this game, nobody cares if pros are leaving

If pros are so mad that BRs are bad from horizontal recoil that they’d rather quit instead of just using a different gun, then good riddance. No need for that kind of whiny trash here.

[Album] MFW when someone writes "when" after MFW

(bgyoshi) #40

@Unrivaled said:

https://imgur.com/gallery/l3SHn

Kinda like saying SCUBA gear. Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus gear seems super redundant.

Or like when you write that after that so that that is that word that is that part of the sentence.

Or when when is where your focus is.

That’s probably why Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

…although if police are getting too discriminatory against buffalo, and the police police police policing buffalo, then should we police police police police who police police police? Obviously, because police police police police police police

Oh are you thinking I need more punctuation? I agree. Take this situation for example. Say I own a restaurant that sells fish and chips and I want to put a hyphen between the words fish and and and and and chips in my fish and chips sign. Wouldn’t that sentence ‘I want to put a hyphen between the words Fish and And and And and Chips in my Fish-And-Chips sign’ have been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish, and between Fish and and, and and and And, and And and and, and and and And, and And and and, and and and Chips, as well as after Chips?" This sentence is much easier to read because the writer placed commas between and and & and and and And, & and and and And & and And and and, & and And and and & and and and And, & and and and And & and And and and, & and And and and & and and and.

TL;DR Yeah I agree, fuck english.