==> ⛧⛧⛧Today at 6:55 PM Also: Avalanche should allow players to help them through testing and bug hunting, so bugs are (mostly) eradicated BEFORE a DLC is launched.
==>Reaction: And this, THIS states what I always said, and WHY I ask you to allow us to help you out:
ArctasiToday at 7:17 PM
I like the system the Subnautica games have where if you see a bug you can immediately send in a bug report right there right then, it would be so helpful here.
Please, I ask of you, humbly…
I even beg you…
Please let us help you…
We can do quite a few things, if you allow us…?
@0L0
That is the whole issue, isn’t it, sir?
Bugs exist.
Some even ARCANE bugs that just do not get fixed (mostly due to it’s complexity, or other quite valid reason?).
The game should be “bug free” (impossible, I know, but you get my point, right?), and DLC should not add additional bugs )again, impossible, but here too you understand me, I reckon).
If we were allowed to test the DLC and what not, we could already hunt down a plethora of issues, being it:
Balance issues
things not working
broken missions
save file corruption
graphical bugs
…
One of the reasons the DLC had bad reviews… bugs.
Eliminate these BEFORE official released, and reviews might not be this harsh.
And I KNOW for fact… us players would be glad to help out.
And… for FREE!!!
Or am I wrong?
PS: I have set my goal: I want to rescue the game…
Prevent it from further damage by bad reviews.
And in doing so… get players to play with us.
It’s currently at just under 90% positive on Steam.
We DO currently have a small focused testing group who helps us with the above issues. Should we need more we’ll for sure lert people know here! Bug-fixing has been, and will continue to be, a big focus.
mic drop
But can agree here Graham, over all for the reviews I’ve seen of the DLC they have been positive to very positive. The only complaints i ever saw were when people couldn’t access the DLC initially, but that wasn’t exactly a review of the DLC itself
Do you have any sources for these negative reviews @Xogroroth?
Funny I haven’t came across any reviews of the dlc on ps4. I’m probably about half way through it no bugs yet that I have seen and only one crash were it seemed to freeze but it didn’t crash the ps4 I was able to quit the game and restart it.
The Experimental Game mode would be something you could change before starting the game and would be working like a test server where we could test a new update that is not fully finished for Example: we could test a new inventory system.
that could give the Devs more interation and playground for more ideas and and reactions from the players
and maby a way for more cool events that would be not possible before or testing things like how many shots do i need to kill a Tank with a Möller PP or give us a in-game vote System to get the most accurate results and many more options that could come with that
Whille I think this would be an amazing thing to have in the game and other games do stuff like this too (namely Minecraft) one of the things that I think the devs like about this is not giving spoilers, but having a experimental game mode would allow us to figure out the dps of certain guns and what are most ammo efficient for the amount of damage they do, what type of ammo works best for your play style, and (In my opinion the most important) what skills work best for your play style and how you could utilise them in combat. It would also give you the opportunity to try out different consumables, and work out the best times for using them.
I don´t want to sound rude, but until now, most of the new updates, brought lots of bugs, the last one then…everybody knows…and for some days Himfjall island was missing for the PS4 players.
So it´s obvious something is not right, testing the updates with players might help to prevent issues like these to happen, so as long it would be a different save or “Mode” looks like a good idea.
I think i speak for many, when i say there are many players that enjoy the game, after so many bugs and screw ups, they are still supporting the game and willing to help, so this might be a constructive way to help?
Oh, what I was thinking was like a purpose built map, like completely flat, and you would play with your charater’s clothes and emotes, but nothing else (no skill points, no xp, ect.). And there would be another section in your inventory where you could select stuff to spawn in or something. No, I do not want to lose my save at all.
There’s already an internal beta for testing upcoming content and reporting issues. I don’t think a public one would work, though. It’s not a bad idea, it’s just that I don’t think the dev team could handle the huge influx of players giving input, and organize an experimental game mode on top of the normal game.
You are right, but the thing is, this mode only seems a good idea because their internal beta is not working properly, otherwise it would not be necessary at all, but an entire DLC missing from PS4 clients for some days?
And the recent rocket/ railgun exaggerated stats ?
It might have something to do with the Pandemic…but it´s not some minor bugs .
As a (web) developer myself I thought about the update cycles of this game a lot lately. I know that web development cannot be compared to game development even by a long shot. But some general things apply on both.
Development cycles are one of those things in my opinion.
As development tasks are different for different targets, tasks are prioritized according to their importance and development time required to reach the targets. Usually new features take the longest time while feature expansion is usually less time consuming and bug fixing is the one that has varying time requirements depending on the bugs.
When it comes to priority, bug fixing always has high priorities. While some bugs may have less significance most bugs usually have a high priority and therefore are fixed prior to feature development or at least get more attention then the latter one in the same time frame.
One (and usually the last part) of development is the deployment. Features are deployed when they’re tested and cleared for deployment. One may set a date for release for features and deploy them accordingly. This is usually an internal process definition.
When it comes to bug fixing it is common that the fix is released when the bug is repaired and this is confirmed by tests.
I urge you, the project management, to reconsider your deployment cycles. While new features may take months and therefore the release can be adjusted to an internal deployment process. I think bug fixes should be released way more often then new features or feature improvements.
My suggestion is, after an update there should be a hotfix one week later and an additional hotfix if necessary after one or two more weeks. Then you can develop as long as you want/need on features, feature improvements or content upgrades (DLC, more regional features etc.). I think nobody needs features every month but wait for a month (or longer) to have some bug fixes applied is somewhat unnerving.
P.S.: My development and deployment experiences come only from web development and may be not totally appicable. Since English is not my mother tongue it is possible I did not express my thoughts as I would have wished.
but there is one thing and so far i know (Correct me if I am wrong) its only for consoles players important but still i want you to know that the Devs need to pay for every update they do for consoles players
Do you have a source for that? I didn’t find anything for PS4 but for XBOX I found this.
What will it cost me?
There are no fees to apply to ID@Xbox, to submit a game to certification, publish, or update your games. There is a very modest one-time cost associated with development for the Universal Windows Platform.
