JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

Forums

7/24/2017 4:36:56 PM
29
I'm going to make this a follow up post for all those who are saying "your top concerns will be addressed in the final game." That may very well be true, but I believe you are making an assumption and just taking bungie's word for it - and Bungie may have just issued the statement in order to try to sooth the heat that they're taking right now. First, lets look at their excuse: [quote]The PVE game tuning has changed pretty significantly since the Beta build was deployed. The nature of a Beta of this scale requires that it’s based off a build of the game that is now months old. So, in many cases, your feedback is helping us validate changes that were previously made based on internal feedback and playtesting. For example, we too felt that ammo (especially power ammo) was too scarce in PvE. In addition to retuning the drop rates, we built a system that guarantees power ammo drops for you and your Fireteam from certain enemies, giving power weapons a more reliable and predictable role in your arsenal. Other areas where we’ve made significant tuning changes include grenade effectiveness in PvE, Boss vitality, and weapon damage against non-player combatants.[/quote] I'm going to take this excuse point by point: 1. What can you learn by product testing an obsolete version of the game? It's like Apple product-testing the Iphone 4S right now when they offer several superior products. It doesn't make sense. The comparative value is so low that it literally makes no sense to product test an obsolete version of the game when a superior version is presumably available. 2. IF a superior version was available, then wouldn't it make sense to product-test THAT version so that if there is any additional fine-tuning they need to do, they can be well prepared to issue a hotfix patch before launch so that you deliver a far superior, more refined product? I think that makes complete sense - and that is why most companies don't product test OLD, OBSOLETE versions of their products. IMO, this excuse just doesn't fly. 3. Even if they didn't want to use the final tunes for the release of the game, they presumably had the tunes from the reveal available, and the game was far better received during the reveal. Even players who are unhappy with the settings now, players like RWG and Lost Sols, reported that the beta was NOT reflective of their experience with the reveal. They could have easily used those settings for the beta, and the beta may have been more well received. 4. They said themselves that they released the beta with poor tuning for the purpose of confirming their own thoughts on the matter, but this is just hogwash. Why purposely release a bad product for the purposes of confirming that it is bad? That doesn't make sense, especially when Bungie knew from the outset prior to the beta that there were a LOT of skeptics regarding many of the changes they're making to the game. Why give MORE fuel to add to the fire so close to launch, especially when that fuel is likely to increase negative feedback and reduce overall sales? After all, Bungie is in the business to sell videogames, so putting a bad product out there doesn't even make logical sense. 5. This is a beta, but it is NOT [u]JUST[/u] a beta. Given all the skeptics out there, Bungie knows that this beta will be a crucial point for the success or failure of D2. They used it as a marketing tool to try to boost pre-orders, and they know that the beta period is a time when they should be cementing pre-orders, winning over skeptics, and increasing pre-launch sales. So it makes absolutely NO business sense to NOT put your best foot forward in an attempt to do so. After all, Bungie is a business, and we can expect that a business would act in its own best interest to further its own goals (sell more games). Given all of these arguments, and Bungie's poor reputation for being honest and transparent, the fact that they came out and said "all these issues will be fixed in the final release" tends to fall on deaf ears. I don't think Bungie is stupid enough to purposely release a bad version of the game for the beta when they know it is a crucial moment for the game. I think it is FAR more likely that Bungie saw this tuning and did not see any problems with it. I do think they will try certain bandaids to try to make the game more palatable, but I don't think they will be anything but quick-fix temporary solutions. There is only so much they can do since they won't tune PVE separately from PVP. So while they can decrease ability recharge times, they can't decrease it too much because not having access to abilities is a pillar of their PVP-first approach. This is ALSO the reason why armor can only do so much to impact the ability regen times. Ammo drops? They can always increase those, but it doesn't address the issue that PVE players just plain don't like whittling away at strong bosses with weak weapons. There's nothing engaging or exciting about it, and that kind of play DECREASES rather than INCREASES replayability. The TL;DR- I don't buy that Bungie was testing an old, obsolete product. I think it FAR more likely that they simply don't respect PVE players - as has been their pattern of behavior over the last 3 years. I don't trust them at all to implement a solution that does anything more than the bare minimum to shut PVE players up, but I don't believe they will actually give us anything to make us happy. THAT kind of effort will be reserve for the PVP crowd.
English

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • ^This

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Absolutely spot on. Looks like the damage has been done. A lot of people have cancelled their preorders.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Very intelligent thought-out post. Bungie won't be able to trade on their name like they did Vanilla Destiny. Bungies' overlord Activision will be very displeased.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • ^ smart I realize what you are saying might be smart, but Bungie aint smart.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Q: what's the lead time for testing, verification and approval from Sony and Microsoft to place a game on PSN and XBL respectively ?

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I'm not an expert on this one. I don't play PS4, so I'm not qualified to weigh in regards to the PS Cert process. I do know that Warframe is able to get its updates through certification in anywhere between 2-4 weeks, but they have a very flexible engine that allows for them to turn around and make changes quickly, and generally speaking, MS certifies their content quite quickly. Based on my experience with WF, I would guess that something like a beta that features one strike, one storyline mission, a few cutscenes, and PVP would likely take the same amount of time as it takes for WF to certify changes that include additions to quests, new areas to explore, new guns, new primes, etc. I simply don't buy that the Cert issue for a game like this would be significant.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Neither is this Guardian - it would be interesting to understand if lead time is material.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Given the fact that Bungie had a playable version at the reveal, two months prior to the beta, I don't think the time to certify content for a beta would be a factor in this case. They announced the beta long ahead of schedule. If they didn't build flexibility into the beta in terms of Tunes, that was their problem. Oh, but that's right, we saw that they updated the tunes on the beta and extended the beta a two extra days. So I'm guessing that they could have changed the tunes at will, and they were just comfortable with the way it was tuned when the beta began. Think about that for a second. Bungie was comfortable with the way the beta was tuned when the beta began....

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Hmmmm food for thought

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by blade329: 7/26/2017 2:11:18 PM
    I want you so badly for you to be wrong on this. Maybe if I close my eyes and ears and, "I'm not listening....la lal la la la.....". Nope, it didn't work. It just makes too much sense.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Bump !!! I Agree 100%!!

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • This all day!

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I couldn't have said it better sir... I really hope that bungie just reads it A LOT of us y1s and raiders feel this way.... well said!

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • I think that you summed that up very nicely. I never bought this old build nonsense either and have just ranted on another thread, about it. Whilst Bungie can address such issues as ammo drops in PvE they can't alter a weapon and armour system that was built around PvP. Even if they suddenly change their philosophy of keeping PvP and PvE as one entity they would still have to make adjustments within the constraints of the system they have built so heavily weighted towards PvP. I have said in a previous thread somewhere that had Destiny 1 not existed Destiny 2, on what I have seen so far, would be a good game. It's beautiful to look at, the gameplay is good, it seems to have a storyline etc. But I did glimpse the superb potential in Destiny 1 for glorious PvE(,PvP was secondary originally) with space magic etc. After that Destiny 2 can only ever be meh Bungie have consistently lied to their community. I have no reason to trust them to make any changes above the bare minimum they think will keep PvE players playing

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Now they weren't specific about which concerns have already been addressed, Bungie has said that the beta is a months old build and they have already changed things and that they are glad to see that the changes are things people agreed needed changing. Not really sure what that means in Bungie doublespeak, but I am still willing to give them a chance on this. I think the beta had some very specific parameters set on it that created the thing we got. You know, super charge rate, ammo drop rate and so on. I think I read somewhere that we were under leveled for the beta and strike in order to make it last longer. I also think that some players haven't realized that you need to use your secondary first on shielded enemies to get the shield down. And I'm not saying I disagree with you, just that I am giving Bungie a small benefit of the doubt that they haven't completely screw this all up.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote] And I'm not saying I disagree with you, just that I am giving Bungie a small benefit of the doubt that they haven't completely screw this all up.[/quote] They've been given the benefit of the doubt for the past 3 years. I think before they are given any more leeway, they need to earn it. The fact that they didn't use D2 as an opportunity to solve one of their BIGGEST problems - a unified PVE and PVP sandbox - just takes away any goodwill that may have otherwise developed. Had they gotten rid of the unified sandbox, it would be MUCH easier for me to give them this leeway. If they had spent the past two+ years conversing with their community about changes that need to be made to the game to better balance PVP, it might be easier to give them the benefit of the doubt. Had they not systematically dismantled what made PVE enjoyable in the first place for the sake of PVP, I might have gone easier on them. But they didn't. They've largely disrespected, undermined, and taken for granted their PVE community. So I don't see where they've earned the right to be given the benefit of the doubt at this point.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • They have said that they are looking into a PVP/PVE gun differentiation. Granted with the new weapon loadouts thing, that doesn't really fix anything. I'm not here backing Bungie, they have a habit of taking feedback and giving the most extreme and unasked for response possible multiple times over. Mad that the story is meh and the lore isn't in the game and that grimoire isn't in the game? Let's get rid of grimoire and do worldbuilding in game. No one asked for grimoire to go away. Ok, I'm not gonna continue, my doctor said I can only rage out two times a day now.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • 1. Test your network stability and the how effective the changes are to network architecture for PVP. Especially if you aren't making any changes to these in the re-tuning of the game. 2. A----It might not be ready for public testing. B----it might not have been able to be certified by MS and Sony in time for the beta. 3. The purpose of the beta was to stress test the game.....not to act as a demo. Yes, it was a preliminary tuning of the game's weapons systems, but that was not its primary intention. But AS a preliminary tuning, its worthy for feedback to the dev. 4. Sample size. You can't HIRE enough play testers to replicate the breadth and scope of feedback you can get from letting your customer base test the product. Yes it confirmed what they already thought....but sometimes it doesn't. Bioware got burned with Mass Effect: Andromeda because they knew that they had a flawed game, but their internal testing suggest that they'd still get an 85 metacritic rating for reviews. It didn't. It got a 71 from Metacritic and a 4.8 from players. They may have found that the situation isn't as bad as they thought.....or they might have found out it was even worse. .5 The only people this is going to "chase off" are people who were already on the fence about the game, and were looking for a reason not to buy it. Those who can be "gotten" may come back later if the release version gets good reviews or word-of-mouth. Those who were chased away permanently were probably not "gettable". Disagree with your conclusions. I've seen games with FAR worse tuning problems than D2 is having in its beta get turned around in less time than Bungie has before release. The Division was---at the end of last summer----one of the most broken games I've ever played in 40 years of gaming and a DYING game. Massive completely overhauled the game's economy, loot system, and gear systems....., and completely re-tuned it in 8 weeks. Bungie has 6 weeks to fix a tuning problem that they've already said they started work on before the beta even dropped.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote]Bungie has 6 weeks to fix a tuning problem that they've already said they started work on before the beta even dropped.[/quote] And this right hear is where you lose all credibility. "Bungie says" yeah, as if we haven't heard that lines before and them not backing up their own statements. Then you have paywalls that everyone loves that a lot of Bungie lovers swore Ttk paywall was a "mistake" you want to know something really interesting? Here it is with D2 and lone behold another paywall... [b]IB and Trials will be Removed when D2 is released.[/b] So please tell me how this sits well with gamers that wont buy D2 with all the other lies and nonsense this company has pulled this last couple years. And tell me with how everyone is so "happy" about how this beta was put out that If some gamers go back to D1. What else is this company going to ( Remove ) from D1 to try to force gamers to buy D2? I understand that you're optimistic about it. But you're forgetting the damage that actually has been done that doesn't just disappear and this beta left a bad taste in a hell of a lot of gamers mouth.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Tuning problem!? Bro get into this reality, this game is trash.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • [quote]1. Test your network stability and the how effective the changes are to network architecture for PVP. Especially if you aren't making any changes to these in the re-tuning of the game. [/quote] You want to tell me with a straight face they couldn't test the network stability and network architecture in a better tuned version of the game, like what they had at the reveal? I'm sorry, but there is NOTHING you can say to convince me that this was an old version and they absolutely [u][b]HAD[/b][/u] no other alternative but to use this really crappy version of the game to conduct those tests. IMO, they could easily conduct the same test with a game that was better tuned. [quote] 2. A----It might not be ready for public testing. B----it might not have been able to be certified by MS and Sony in time for the beta.[/quote] I'm not sure I buy this either. After all, the content they had for the reveal was played on PS and many who attended the event got to play it there. That is quite literally public testing, even though it wasn't necessarily open to the masses. Whether it was certified in time, that might be plausible, but the blame for that would fall on Bungie again. MS is actually pretty fast in certifying content, as Warframe can get content certified for mass circulation from Xbox in a couple of weeks, rarely over a month. So I just don't foresee this being an issue from the Xbox side of things. [quote]3. The purpose of the beta was to stress test the game.....not to act as a demo. Yes, it was a preliminary tuning of the game's weapons systems, but that was not its primary intention. But AS a preliminary tuning, its worthy for feedback to the dev. [/quote] Maybe so, but they could still stress test a better tuned version. They said themselves they knew it was bad. They used the beta for marketing purposes (pre-orders), and they knew there were a lot of skeptics regarding the changes they made in the game. So either it was a horrible business decision to release THIS version for beta testing, which I doubt because Bungie isn't that stupid, or they actually saw no problems with the way it was tuned (far more likely) and while some issues may be fixable, the fact that they thought this version of the game was alright is simply major cause for concern. [quote]4. Sample size. You can't HIRE enough play testers to replicate the breadth and scope of feedback you can get from letting your customer base test the product. Yes it confirmed what they already thought....but sometimes it doesn't. Bioware got burned with Mass Effect: Andromeda because they knew that they had a flawed game, but their internal testing suggest that they'd still get an 85 metacritic rating for reviews. It didn't. It got a 71 from Metacritic and a 4.8 from players. They may have found that the situation isn't as bad as they thought.....or they might have found out it was even worse. [/quote] Again, while this might be plausible, I think when you have a lot riding on the beta as Bungie knew they did given this game's history and development, it just doesn't make sense that they wouldn't put their best foot forward. That they KNEW this wasn't their best foot and released it anyways makes it very worrisome. [quote].5 The only people this is going to "chase off" are people who were already on the fence about the game, and were looking for a reason not to buy it. Those who can be "gotten" may come back later if the release version gets good reviews or word-of-mouth. Those who were chased away permanently were probably not "gettable". [/quote] But the amount of people who were on the fence, especially after the reveal and all the leaked info since then was enormous! Either they discounted how many people are actually on the fence (taking their audience for granted) or they have internally accepted that D2 simply won't sell like the first game. And maybe that is the truth of the matter. Deej did acknowledge that some guardians wouldn't be carrying on the adventure.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Edited by SHDGunner: 7/24/2017 8:31:23 PM
    1. Not if they were still working on that version that is better tuned....or earlier builds didn't have the needed network code that needed to be tested. 2. Not looking to assign blame. Simply pointing out that Bungie may have been forced to choose between getting the network stress testing they needed OR giving the public a playable demo of the most current build......but not able to do both. 3. Disagree. ITs only a "horrible" decision if your main goal is to give the public a demo. Its not a horrible decision if you realize that you need the network stress testing in time to make major changes if necessary, more than you need the marketing push of a public demo. 4. I don't think Bungie has as much "riding" on this beta as you think. In 2014, Bungie was creating a game type so new that they couldn't even effectively explain what the game was to people. So they gave people essentially a QUARTER of the release version of the game to DEMO for 10 days in order to let people figure out what the game actually was. It was one part wild success....and one part catastrophe . In 2017. Everyone knows what this game is, and it has a passionate, dedicated player base. So while the game's fans are understandably upset about the tuning of the beta, I really don't think this is going to be a deal breaker for many people. ...and even if it is, it represents FAR less of a threat to the franchise than a rocky release of the game because they delayed the beta too long trying to give people a player demo of the final game tuning....and ran into major networking problems that they didn't allow enough time to fix.... ...and the game performs poorly on Launch DAy. Ask Bioware how well that strategy worked for them when they cancelled their public beta, and surprised everyone with a buggy, glitch release version of the game. 5. Deej acknowledged this because you can't please everyone....and you have lots of people projecting their wish list for this franchise onto this game. At the end of the day, Bungie had to pick a direction and go there....and there is NO version of this game that was ever going to make a community this large and this contentious, universally happy. No matter what Bungie did with the game, some people were either going to be pissed at the changes.....or pissed at the LACK of changes. But I think you over-estimate the number of people for whom any of this is liable to be a deal breaker.....and over-estimate the "gettable" nature of those for whom it turns out to be. Destiny is...and always will be....a polarizing game. It is trying to ride a middleground between two gaming genres (MMOs and FPS) that tend to attract gamers of polar opposite personality types. Polar opposite temperments, and polar opposite expectations from the gaming experience. ....and no matter where Bungie sets the balance point between the two. Some people will curse them for it. Bottom line. Whats wrong with this beta is fixable in the time before release. Bungie has claimed that they've already started the process of fixing it. Now lets wait and see whether they deliver or not. There is no point in giving feedback if you aren't going to give them the space and the opportunity to ACT upon that feedback.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • GTFO.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • And back to playing devils advocate I see, lol.

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

  • Trying to be that fair critic....

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon