Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by drimaxus
I read somewhere that Larian planned to have the game in early access for at least a year. Is that true? It sounds to me like the early access shouldn't have been released yet then, and we are doing a big part of the testing and paying for it, saving tons of money for the development. If that is the case I hope Larian rewards us early access players GREATLY because even though the game looks promising and fun, the experience is way more unpolished than it should have been and than other early access games.


Why reward us? They have been upfront about it, and said why they are doing it.
Early access for any game is like this: Pay in early, support the developer, partake in development, play early.

If you don't want to play an unpolished game, then you should wait for the official release.

I bought in to Early Access because the game looked promising, and 100+ hours proves that, and I wanted to support Larian make a better game. I don't need their thanks or be treated differently. I just want to play DnD.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
My point here is that Early access doesn't have to have so many bugs, you don't need a whole year to re-balance combat or change surface effects on cantrips, make jump an action and all the crap we've been asking, you can do that in an update in a couple of months. But what this game has is mostly glitches, parts without cinematics or broken graphics, all that shouldn't be in the Early Access because we aren't here to report bugs, we are just here to talk about GAMEPLAY!!

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by denhonator
Originally Posted by pinklily
That said, it would be really cool if, in the full release, they had a special 'thank you' item for early access players. This would be a nice gesture, but certainly not necessary.


While it is a nice thought, I don't like any exclusives that affect gameplay. It's like you're not supposed to have that. Feels like cheating. Rather just throw it away than use it. And on the other hand there will be some people wanting to have that exclusive item but can't.

Something that doesn't affect gameplay would be fine. Like exclusive hair, perhaps.


Exclusive pubic hair. Maybe long and braided

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Peranor
I mean. They were upfront with the fact that the EA was going to last for at least a year and that the EA build was very unpolished. After that it's up to you as a consumer to decide if it's worth paying for or not.

I'm note sure what people expect from an EA, but at least I does not expect a complete game. Not even a stable game.



I expected to play a solid game and comment on gameplay issues, re balancing and so on. But most of what I see are bugs and glitches, lots of broken mechanics. If a QA team played this before us, did no one said all the things we are saying? I am really wondering if a whole team has played this game before us or we are the first real playtest

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by drimaxus
Exclusive pubic hair. Maybe long and braided

Your Dwarven ancestors would be proud!

Joined: Aug 2016
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2016
It's probably going to be longer than a year, since I'm sure Covid set them back abit.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Sigi98
Originally Posted by drimaxus
the experience is way more unpolished than it should have been and than other early access games.


are you kidding me? The game already has a huge amount of content and replayability, and aside from a few cinemetic glitches, very rarely crashes and bugs, the game is already very polished for an EA game that launched 3 weeks ago. Also, they are constantly working on these glithces and bugs, and just released a patch that resolves some of these. Cut 'em some slack.



What I mean is that a whole QA team should have played this game before EA. I used to work doing that, and if they did, why did no one report all the gameplay issues that we are reporting? Party movement? Combat balance, Inventory management, all those things we all complain about wouldn't have made it out if they were reviewed first in playtest. In this situation seems like we are the first testers and we have to report all sort of basic bugs and clunky mechanics that could have been easily spotted in QA

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by drimaxus
My point here is that Early access doesn't have to have so many bugs, you don't need a whole year to re-balance combat or change surface effects on cantrips, make jump an action and all the crap we've been asking, you can do that in an update in a couple of months. But what this game has is mostly glitches, parts without cinematics or broken graphics, all that shouldn't be in the Early Access because we aren't here to report bugs, we are just here to talk about GAMEPLAY!!

I don't know the exact details, but I'm confident that Larian got more data in the first day of EA than in ALL OF THEIR QA. Probably even the first hours.

Yes, they could have spent another year testing things and making sure all permutations were tested, removing all the bugs and broken graphics and adding all the cutscenes.
Or they could do what they did, allowing us to play the game earlier and find all the bugs in a fraction of the time.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3

I don't know the exact details, but I'm confident that Larian got more data in the first day of EA than in ALL OF THEIR QA. Probably even the first hours.

Yes, they could have spent another year testing things and making sure all permutations were tested, removing all the bugs and broken graphics and adding all the cutscenes.
Or they could do what they did, allowing us to play the game earlier and find all the bugs in a fraction of the time.



If that were true, why would they need over 365 days of that amazing productivity in QA?
Most of what needed to be said and reported has already been posted multiple times, it is very clear what is the general view of the consumers... is it going to take a whole year to implement those changes? Or maybe they went ahead in releasing the EA because they didn't have all the classes finished and cinematics pending etc?

What is the need behind releasing the EA when you don't have most of the content finished? I mean the content you KNOW it is going to go in the game like the missing basic classes, customization options, cinematics that you know are going to be there etc?

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by drimaxus
Originally Posted by mrfuji3

I don't know the exact details, but I'm confident that Larian got more data in the first day of EA than in ALL OF THEIR QA. Probably even the first hours.

Yes, they could have spent another year testing things and making sure all permutations were tested, removing all the bugs and broken graphics and adding all the cutscenes.
Or they could do what they did, allowing us to play the game earlier and find all the bugs in a fraction of the time.

If that were true, why would they need over 365 days of that amazing productivity in QA?
Most of what needed to be said and reported has already been posted multiple times, it is very clear what is the general view of the consumers... is it going to take a whole year to implement those changes? Or maybe they went ahead in releasing the EA because they didn't have all the classes finished and cinematics pending etc?

What is the need behind releasing the EA when you don't have most of the content finished? I mean the content you KNOW it is going to go in the game like the missing basic classes, customization options, cinematics that you know are going to be there etc?

It is better to get feedback and fix bugs early on in the process. If you get feedback after developing and releasing the whole game, then you have to change the whole game if something is clearly broken throughout it.
If you get feedback after releasing 1/4 of the game, then you can incorporate changes WHILE you develop the remaining 3/4, saving so much time.

So, they don't actually need 365 days of EA. They need our first ~2 weeks, which they will use to develop the game over the remaining 334 days. I assume they'll release a super big patch in like 6 months, which we will again test for about 2 weeks and provide them with the info they need to develop the remaining parts of the game.

Joined: Sep 2017
E
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
E
Joined: Sep 2017
I don't mind if takes a year or more as long as they will be keeping it alive with big, meaningful content updates atleast once a month and most importantly listening to player feedback, not just collecting some in-game data while counting the money.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
They do have more meaningful resources than we do with the heat maps and other analytics so that on top of our feedback i feel like this will work out just fine. development takes time and i wish more people would understand that. luckily most people here seem to

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
I assume they'll release a super big patch in like 6 months, which we will again test for about 2 weeks and provide them with the info they need to develop the remaining parts of the game.


I think it would be make more sense to release several smaller patches with overhauls for different systems, so each major change can be assessed on its own in terms of game impact. If you make a huge patch with many changes, it will be harder to track what is responsible for what problem. If you release one thing at a time, you can clearly see how the whole system reacts to it, how the gameplay changes. And if a patch has one exciting shiny new thing, all the players will rush to test it out.

For example, we know we'll be getting more classes and races during EA. I expect a new class to drop every 2 months or so.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Uncle Lester
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
I assume they'll release a super big patch in like 6 months, which we will again test for about 2 weeks and provide them with the info they need to develop the remaining parts of the game.

I think it would be make more sense to release several smaller patches with overhauls for different systems, so each major change can be assessed on its own in terms of game impact. If you make a huge patch with many changes, it will be harder to track what is responsible for what problem. If you release one thing at a time, you can clearly see how the whole system reacts to it, how the gameplay changes. And if a patch has one exciting shiny new thing, all the players will rush to test it out.

For example, we know we'll be getting more classes and races during EA. I expect a new class to drop every 2 months or so.

Oh yeah, fair and I hope this is the case. I was exaggerating to keep my hopes down so I could be pleasantly surprised when they drop a beefy patch.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Oh yeah, fair and I hope this is the case. I was exaggerating to keep my hopes down so I could be pleasantly surprised when they drop a beefy patch.


Haha, I get it. I'm not even an EA player and I'm still super impatient for anything more than bugfixes and minor tweaks.

Joined: Oct 2020
P
stranger
Offline
stranger
P
Joined: Oct 2020
Already bored with it. Wish I never bought it

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by PMSbloodrage
Already bored with it. Wish I never bought it

That is another thing that might happen, one year is a long time to play an unfinished game and if it is too unpolished you are bound to get bored before they even release it.

People keep saying there is a lot of content in the EA but to me is very limited, you can only create one custom character at a time so if you want to try different classes you need to do many playthroughs, I am getting sick of watching the same clunky cinematics over and over again, and the boring combat mechanics.

Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
This argument of "we pay to find bugs in a game" is really strange. You talk as if you getting nothing out of this. Maybe you feel like that but I don't think it's true


Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Oct 2020
N
member
Offline
member
N
Joined: Oct 2020
You dont have too get it now you know, but i've already put in enough hours to make $60 worth it.

Joined: Sep 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by drimaxus
My point here is that Early access doesn't have to have so many bugs, you don't need a whole year to re-balance combat or change surface effects on cantrips, make jump an action and all the crap we've been asking, you can do that in an update in a couple of months. But what this game has is mostly glitches, parts without cinematics or broken graphics, all that shouldn't be in the Early Access because we aren't here to report bugs, we are just here to talk about GAMEPLAY!!



And you base this assessment on your expansive background as a computer game developer? Your vast expertise in creating and programming RPG's? Your long involvement with Q and A of EA/Beta games? Oh, I know !! Your renown writing skills as portrayed by the numerous best selling fantasy novels, game products and artistic renditions of fantasy art.

Always amazes me how much knowledge of game development folks seem to think they have.

Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5