Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 9 of 15 1 2 7 8 9 10 11 14 15
Joined: May 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by mrfuji3

Thank you for this post. I think a lot of us were looking for this type of comment from the Community Update and were disappointed when there wasn't one.

Meh, sort of.
I appreciate that he took the time to write that reply, but without any pretense to speak for everyone else I should probably make it clear that on a personal note I'm not looking for being patted on the head.
What I'd like from Larian is more along the lines of telling us what they are taking away from the feedback. What they are planning to do about it.

"We are listening" should be more a prerequisite than an answer.

To be fair, they can't just knee-jerk make changes based on feedback. They have to analyze the feedback and compare it to their game data. Then they have to decide what the community actually wants. Then what the community wants has to be compared to their goals for the game so they can make a decision.

Unless the feedback is overwhelmingly (and obviously) in a certain direction, that's a big undertaking to get right.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Come on people some of you really need to grow a sense of humor. Somehow I doubt they consider our dog petting and bedwarming habits the pinnacle of feedback collection.

So what did the update do? Made the game PLAYABLE for many people that (like you) paid to (you guessed it) PLAY it - if that's not top priority (or shouldn't be), I don't know what is. Furthermore they fixed some issues for multiplayer again to make it playable.
I'd bet there's separate teams working on graphics that were going to polish the cinematics and the models no matter what, so why not release some as they go.

As for the content, that's certainly a bigger issue and can't or shouldn't be undertaken lightly as it will invariably trigger a domino effect.

You are also conveniently forgetting that the vocal few on these forums do not represent the whole community nor target demographics - it pains me to say but there's Steam forums (eugh), reddit and so on and while you (or me) might be of different opinions those matter to Larian as well (as they want to you know SELL the game - or are many of you going to work just for a pat on the back?).

So while you (or me) think combat for example could be more challenging in places, there's still a lot of people (even on these forums - look at help section) who struggle as is. Now should they cater to minority or make it enjoyable for everyone?

And you know as well as I do that some people here will never be satisfied no matter what they end up doing.

So for me the update read: here guys we tried to make the game playable for everyone, hope it works. We are very glad you're mostly enjoying the game and will continue to do our best. Have some cookies. Ok I'll admit shortcomings of the evil route should have been addressed somewhere in that context.

Last edited by Azarielle; 28/10/20 06:47 AM.
Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Yes - Larian have put out almost weekly updates so far - some people in this thread should just get a refund & wait for the finalised version because you can only complain for so long before people ignore you. Dont like & dont have anything constructive to give in the way of feedback...leave & save yourself the stress.

Joined: Oct 2020
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
Yeah, this update pissed me off a bit.
Not for the lack of big changes in the patch (I already said more than once that minor hotfixes are all I'm expecting on the long term) but because the official post that accompanied the patch spent most of its length throwing useless factoids at us without even PRETENDING to acknowledge (let alone address) the most recurring points of criticism.

I feel exactly the same. It was the thing that led me to leave a negative review on Steam, because doing an EA release to use players as unpaid testers without intending to change anything philosophy-wise feels like a scam.

Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Faulkner
Originally Posted by Tuco
Yeah, this update pissed me off a bit.
Not for the lack of big changes in the patch (I already said more than once that minor hotfixes are all I'm expecting on the long term) but because the official post that accompanied the patch spent most of its length throwing useless factoids at us without even PRETENDING to acknowledge (let alone address) the most recurring points of criticism.

I feel exactly the same. It was the thing that led me to leave a negative review on Steam, because doing an EA release to use players as unpaid testers without intending to change anything philosophy-wise feels like a scam.


Things that are easy to change: Bugs and graphical glitches.
Things that take more time to change: Game play and ingame features.

Honestly we shouldn't expect them to start changing the gameplay just yet. (Not to mention some people have way to high expectations to Larian just outright fixing everything they want).

Besides the game has been out for what? Three weeks? I think two patches that fixes glitches and bugs in that timespan is good.

"They didn't acknowledge our whining" is really all you guys are saying.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
For Larian right now, <5e> gameplay seems just fine and dandy......
Priority to game braking bugs. Controller, console and multiplayer support.
Oh and Cinematic dialogue bugs calore, as I expected. Tons of resources going into this so dont hold your breach on other changes.
Oh well. Maybe in 6 months we might get some kind of update on actually gameplay criticism.
MAKE AUTO JUMP FOR <ANYONE CAN DO IT REGULAR JUMPS>!!!!!!!! This is so annoying.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 28/10/20 08:34 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
"THANK YOU
Greetings Adventurer,
Thank you for joining us in Early Access. Thank you for your feedback! It'll be read by the team.

We appreciate you taking the time to leave feedback to help create a better game for everyone to enjoy.

If by chance you've left a bug report, please either use the Help button on the Launcher, or use this link directly:
https://larian.com/support/baldur-s-gate-3#modal
Thank you for your support during Early Access and we look forward to hearing more of your feedback."

This is what they emial you when you send them Feedback. Notice it is not just bug reports...

Seems like Larian wanted more than just bug reports!

Joined: Jun 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Faulkner

I feel exactly the same. It was the thing that led me to leave a negative review on Steam, because doing an EA release to use players as unpaid testers without intending to change anything philosophy-wise feels like a scam.


Being unpaid testers is exactly what we signed up for, and it’s ridiculous at this stage to say they don’t intend to change anything. EA isn’t a process with a turn around of a few weeks, it’s likely to be at least a year.

Hitting bugs and making the game more stable is an obvious place to start. I gave up playing not far into the game due to constant crashes, and frankly I wouldn’t mind having another go (haven’t tried the latest patch yet though).

Even before EA we saw two major changes based on reactions to gameplay streams- initiative systems and ditching the past tense dialogue choices.

There will be other changes, but it will take time for Larian to decide what to change and how to change them. Not everything people ask for will be changed, of course. Probably nowhere near.

Last edited by Dagless; 28/10/20 08:48 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
People have a right to be dissapointed in the turn around times of feedback to acknowledhement ratio.
I just think there are equally a vocal minority who are going overboard, or whose expectations are off the chart in to how this should run. Larian do not have SLA agreements with us, we signed up for the EA to do more than help a studio out. We were oversold NOTHING in return. No promise to address, or acknowledge or fix anything based upon what we uncovered and posted was in the EULA agreement of EA.. Now of course, Larian upfront said they would most certainly look into doing those things and yes, I am sure they would like to be more upfront about what has been uncovered. I think we as fans have a respnsibility to provide constructive feedback on the game and on communication, but equally to be respectful of the current market/working situation and the fact that clearly Larian were overwhelmed with EA sales and feedback. And yes, you signed up for EA because you are fan, because if you are a customer, then you should have read what was on the box and waited for full release.

I've seen a few examples float around here, including Star Cititzen, the most over promised underdelivered game possibly ever, at least until recently. I was there from day one and I can promise you community updates took a fair few weeks to get off the ground. They essentially took the money and built a whole new company and then got to work. Yeah it looks pretty good noy and they still aren't finished, so if that's the standard, I think we can cut Larian a few more weeks.

I do no know of a single game (though there most probably were examples), that went EA or had piad ALpha/Beta's that adressed the biggest concerns so quickly. It is ALWAYS bug fixes first, get the game in its state as playable as possible, soak up the feedback, wait for the smoke to clear and then make a sound judgement call.

But we are going round in circles and I am part of that. So why not all agree that we hope Larian address the big concerns, mention them, acknowledge etc... and let us keep from throwing the baby out with the bath water every time a minor community update comes out about dog petting, that my X hours of playing and feedback was not worthy of recognition.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
A few days ago i made a post titled "isn't this a bit too broken?" because even for an early access release, especially since they're asking full price for it, it was too unstable, buggy and unfinished. For this reason i'm not surprised by this update. Before thinking of changing game mechanics and taking feedback into consideration they have to fix A TON of stuff. The game was already delayed and this is proving they should have waited even more.

Last edited by Albi; 28/10/20 09:29 AM.
Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Albi
A few days ago i made a post titled "isn't this a bit too broken?" because even for an early access release, especially since they're asking full price for it, it was too unstable, buggy and unfinished at launch. For this reason i'm not surprised by this update. Before thinking of changing game mechanics and taking feedback into consideration they have to fix A TON of stuff. The game was already delayed and this is proving they should have waited even more.

Yeah that's standard.... to be fair the criticism is not so much that the issues haven't been fixed, it's that the community updates so far haven't even acknowledged the existence of said topics. Some think that's unreasonable, others like me thinks it's normal at this early stage.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
The game was never "delayed" because it never had an official release date to begin with.
And no, I don't think it's "too broken even for an EA". I have no idea to what alleged standard that comparison would be based on, to begin with.
If anything I remember spending my first hours with the game surprised by how far ahead it was already compared to when DOS 2 entered EA (most of the voice over is already in place, for a start).

I also find any claim that "before addressing core mechanical issues there are bugs to fix" extremely questionable. I'd argue that getting the foundations right should be a priority over any degree of polishing, especially if you don't fancy the idea of having to redo a lot of work twice as you introduce new systems.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Riandor

Yeah that's standard.... to be fair the criticism is not so much that the issues haven't been fixed, it's that the community updates so far haven't even acknowledged the existence of said topics. Some think that's unreasonable, others like me thinks it's normal at this early stage.

I agree to a certain extent. For me it's not "normal" because people paid full price for it and something more was to be expected. Not in terms of features but in terms of polish. It's up to interpretation and sensibility clearly, some people including Larian felt it was good enough and i don't think it is. I'd never have the audacity to ask full price for a game in such early state.

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Albi
Originally Posted by Riandor

Yeah that's standard.... to be fair the criticism is not so much that the issues haven't been fixed, it's that the community updates so far haven't even acknowledged the existence of said topics. Some think that's unreasonable, others like me thinks it's normal at this early stage.

I agree to a certain extent. For me it's not "normal" because people paid full price for it and something more was to be expected. Not in terms of features but in terms of polish. It's up to interpretation and sensibility clearly, some people including Larian felt it was good enough and i don't think it is. I'd never have the audacity to ask full price for a game in such early state.

But Larian stated up front about the price. We should have all known what we were getting into.

As for Tuco's point about bugs over core... fixing graphical crashes to ensure that people can play IS more important that party member size and movement. In essence, that is CORE and what we want is the flavour on top and you know that you and I have similar views and wish lists.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
People "paid full price for it" because what they are buying is a full game.

What they have now is not a full game and not what they paid for. What they have now is preferential access to an incomplete build of a game still in full development.
Which is where the "early" part of "early access" comes from.

Originally Posted by Riandor

As for Tuco's point about bugs over core... fixing graphical crashes to ensure that people can play IS more important that party member size and movement. In essence, that is CORE and what we want is the flavour on top and you know that you and I have similar views and wish lists.

I never experienced a single client crash so far, for what it matters.

Last edited by Tuco; 28/10/20 09:49 AM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Yeah it is very much EARLY Early Access, but actually they stated up front EA would only ever be Act1, witht he promise of the full game at 1.0 release.
So even with the core mechanics fixed and polish and classes etc... we won't have the full game at all in EA, that's what I paid for.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
The game was never "delayed" because it never had an official release date to begin with.
And no, I don't think it's "too broken even for an EA". I have no idea to what alleged standard that comparison would be based on, to begin with.
If anything I remember spending my first hours with the game surprised by how far ahead it was already compared to when DOS 2 entered EA (most of the voice over is already in place, for a start).

I also find any claim that "before addressing core mechanical issues there are bugs to fix" extremely questionable. I'd argue that getting the foundations right should be a priority over any degree of polishing, especially if you don't fancy the idea of having to redo a lot of work twice as you introduce new systems.
It was delayed by a week, the game is out right now, it's available, it's on sale, don't be naive about it. I've played Grounded and the difference compared to this in terms of polish is mind-boggling, sometimes it didn't even feel like a game in early access. And fixing bugs before game mechanics is clearly a priority, especially when people couldn't even play the game for 5 minutes without running into something broken.

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
People "paid full price for it" because what they are buying is a full game.

What they have now is not a full game and not what they paid for. What they have now is preferential access to an incomplete build of a game still in full development.
Which is where the "early" part of "early access" comes from.

Originally Posted by Riandor

As for Tuco's point about bugs over core... fixing graphical crashes to ensure that people can play IS more important that party member size and movement. In essence, that is CORE and what we want is the flavour on top and you know that you and I have similar views and wish lists.

I never experienced a single client crash so far, for what it matters.


I have experienced all of 2 in 40 odd hours of playing, hardly an issue for me either, but there are those who struggle with it, so I very much believe that should be priority 1 and what we want priority 2.

Actually Albi it was "delayed" longer than that because origincally they said August, then it slipped by a month to September, then to October, but it doesn't really matter.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Riandor
Yeah it is very much EARLY Early Access
As I said, it feels almost like a final product compared to how DOS 2 was at the beginning of its EA.
Technical issues are not a concern, bug fixing should not be anyone's genuine concern, more polish rounding up the rough edges will come 100% and I see absolutely no use in pretending otherwise.

What worries me is what they are going to do in terms of core design. How the game will play, if they will ever address some of the shortcoming introduced by their mechanical changes*, the inadequacies of the UI.
Not the level of embellishment that they will add on top, which is pretty much a given.


* frankly I'm not even in the group that worries particularly about "sticking with 5th ed. no matter what". The problem I have with some gameplay loops and potential exploits is that they are goofy and nonsensical, not that they are not "true to to the source".

Last edited by Tuco; 28/10/20 10:15 AM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Jul 2009
I
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
I
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Riandor
Yeah it is very much EARLY Early Access, but actually they stated up front EA would only ever be Act1, witht he promise of the full game at 1.0 release.
So even with the core mechanics fixed and polish and classes etc... we won't have the full game at all in EA, that's what I paid for.


Not really. This is already an early beta to be honest.
The mechanics and system already stands, at least I do not see that Larian has the intention to change anything like removing D:OS influences and such, and all that is left is bugfixes and adding more content.

Page 9 of 15 1 2 7 8 9 10 11 14 15

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