Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Witchalok

Grounded in reality

(301)

Posts: 945

Date of registration
: Mar 6th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Bucharest - Romania

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

11

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 12:48pm

I got about 10 mins through the video. The guy has very little grasp about the mechanics he is complaining about. The guns in BF4 all have spread, it is not a glitch, not to mention he has no idea how suppression works in the first place.


He does not make a good job of explaining it, but the bug that he is describing is there. There are a number of bugs related to the RPG and tiered reload and dying under suppression and getting revived.
I do not fully agree with everything he says, but he does make some good points overall.

@Sheepnub

Going from BC2 to BF3, I blindly bought the game. BC2 was that good in my opinion. Sure it had some issues, but typically I expected DICE to fix them with BF3.
I was utterly disappointed with BF3, but somehow I did get BF4 + premium, riding on the hype train.

Let me tell you that this will never happen again. EA and DICE will have to work hard to ever get my money from now on. I am talking perfect game with perfect launch.
The sentiment that I get from the majority of the people that I play with is the same. BF4 is a travesty of a game. Some would rather still play BF3 than play BF4.

I am not regretting my purchase of BF4 because it was not a financial burden. But the game did not warrant a day 1 purchase, nor was Premium worth it (although I got it for pretty cheap as a bundle).
In the future, I will refrain from purchasing any game by DICE on day 1, and I will probably only get it when it goes on sale.
Now, if enough people have this sentiment, and if enough people express it publicly, then it might persuade EA that it's better to launch a complete, almost bug-free game, than to rush the game and cash in the money.
EA should be in this for the long run, they should care about the customers' opinions.


On a completely separate note, it is interesting to see what will happen to all of the law-suits.
It's OK to lie to the customer about the game, but it is not OK to lie to the investors.

Posts: 34

Date of registration
: Sep 18th 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Germany

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

12

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 1:18pm

I play Battlefield since BF2. At itīs release BF2 was also a big pile of bugs and instabillity. Servercrashs, clientcrashs, dolphindiving, granademassacres on infantrymaps (Karkand) and netcode.
Now the most refering to it as the holygrail of Battlefield, but this took also a long way of patches, mods and maturing of the active community to be that game as it is/was.

And nothing else I expected, when I bought BF3 and BF4. BF3 was bought more out of hype, but as they showed BF4 at Gamescon, I was very happy to see, that they got back to BF2 terms of gameplay (Commander, Ammocount on vehicles, old class system). And so I decided to buy it, with all the for me expected consequences like lot of bugs, instabillity and raging, stupid hypeplayers.
First in, last out

Posts: 8

Date of registration
: Jun 7th 2012

Platform: PS3

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

13

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 1:39pm

Okay, I'm going to give you guys a clue because you have none (although Symthic is generally not so clueless as some other forums I could mention).

But before I do that, first let me present my credentials. I am a 45 your old software developer, I work on embedded real-time software for Bluetooth chips. Yeah, those things you stick in your ear - they also connect your game controller to your console too. I have a post-graduate degree in Software Engineering and I have been working in the software business for over 20-years. Writing games for consoles/PC is completely different from what I do. I could not get a job at EA - I am not qualified and I don't have the right experience but software is software and I am drawing on the parallels.

1) Writing software is hard! If it was easy, everyone would be doing it.

2) Writing defect free software is incredibly hard, orders of magnitude harder. To prove that something is defect free gets exponentially more difficult and therefore more expensive the more defects you try remove. For something like avionics software they use redundancy. You don't have one computer system, you have three - all written by different teams on different hardware in different places, so if one system screws up you have backups. Obviously, that's overkill for a game. There is a cost-benefit argument - it has to be 'good enough' for the majority of users. Some would say this is how Microsoft got to where they are now. They don't write the best OS or office package. It's good enough and, crucially, cheap enough for most people. Shit, Windows 8 is a fucking mess but I bet you all still use it because you want to run the latest games on the latest DX version.

3) Now try writing a multi-player game on PC (always a moving target), and two new console platforms AND a new framework (Frostbite 3), and not have any crashes, netcode problems and other problems at launch. Hell, that's why they have a Beta but they also have a deadline. Miss the holiday season and your toast - they have pressure, sometimes it makes diamonds - mostly you get coal. So they release it when it's good enough for most people. Also, there are some issues that only shake out when a system goes live. You can't recreate the effect of the global playstation network in a test lab.

4) You think the developer don't care? They care. By the time of the release they are in a serious love-hate relationship with the game. They don't want it to crash, they want people to love it, because they love it. They have marketing, sales and shareholders breathing down their necks, and, at the end of the day, they have families who would like to remember what they look like sometimes. So, it gets released and then priority 1 is the first patch.

5) I have been playing Battlefield since 1942 (the original PC game, not the year). I can categorically state from experience that every battlefield release has had bugs, crashes and patches. To say that the earlier Battlefield games were better because they had less bugs is a stupid comparison. For each release, the game has got more complex and has added new features, more complexity and increasingly more powerful hardware and different platforms. I had to overclock my 75Mhz Pentium II to play Battlefield 1942 when it came out. DX 7 was the bleeding edge. Now I can run it in a Web-browser on my laptop (BF Heroes is what I am referring to here). So yeah, more complexity means more bugs. Personally, I think BF3 was worse at release than BF4 but I am playing on PS4 - not PC. PC's always have more bugs thanks to the almost infinite amount of different HW configurations. Consoles are easy in comparison.

6) Do a good job and no one says anything, fuck up and they will line up to tell you. Who'd want that kind of job?

Conclusion: Complaining that Battlefield has bugs at launch that 'makes it unplayable', which may be true for some people, and that EA are shit, the developers don't care and that you aren't going to buy another Battlefield game makes you sound like a whiny, over-privileged, clueless fuck. If I was an EA developer, I would be glad to see the back of you. If you want Battlefield to be better, participate in the Beta, provide bug and crash reports and show some fucking respect.

It still crashes - so what? There will be patches, it will get better.

Posts: 1,553

Date of registration
: Sep 4th 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Germany

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

14

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 1:47pm

Moving ADS spread values

WoopsyYaya - YouTube(Tipps und Tricks) [Deutsch/HD]


Show Gun Master some love <3 - Vol. 3


Funny quotes


As a main hater on this forum, I say no, it's not worth it.
I have been playing Battlefield since 1942 (the original PC game, not the year).
now I'd jerk off a hobo
With a compensator and angled grip I click people to death like I was playing diablo.
AKU-12 stomps it in the nuts and posts the video to WorldStarHipHop.

Posts: 265

Date of registration
: Apr 30th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

15

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 1:58pm

Verse, I agree with much of what you have posted and I also have been playing since BF1942, but equally I think there is a huge problem in how the games are presented. BF games have always had issues (the broken browser when BC2 was released, the lack of basic server tools and team balancing when BF3 was released), but each release in recent years does appear to back up the fact that the situation is becoming worse - developers appear to be delivering a less polished product than they were before and this is almost certainly because of pressure from the publishers (EA in this case).

Someone said that DICE asked for another six months to work on the game - and even though they have had just over 3 months since release already, much of that time has been firefighting issues rather than focusing on polishing the game, so do I think that the extra 6 months would have made a BIG difference to the game, even if it still needed tweaking after release (which it almost certainly would have).
I also think that the added pressure of having to deliver additional content (DLCs) pretty much as soon as the game ships for "console exclusives" (again another result of financial considerations), also doesn't help matters and detracts from the product on release.

Basically the end result is that the evidence points to games developed by studios under EA or Activision are becoming less polished and less complete upon release, because the dev studios are being over-ruled by their publishers and the publishers are also trying to mitigate against lost sales from disenfranchised customers by pushing out pre-order bonuses and extra content.

I love battlefield as a concept and franchise and have been a very loyal fan, but this is a very worrying trend and the state of Battlefield 4, the way that the core gameplay mechanics have been so poorly implemented and the concern that this will not improve as long as people continue to throw money at the big publishers makes me much less likely to trust in their games in future and more likely to look elsewhere for my FPS jollies.

Leaving aside the more abusive comments you made, you said to participate in the beta and provide feedback to make the game better - well I (and many other people) did participate in the "beta" and I think you may not appreciate the issues with this suggestion.
1. The beta code is often an earlier more stable build of the code and therefore not reflective of its current state.
2. EA/DICE seem to treat the beta as a limited demo rather than a serious attempt to identify and fix bugs before launch. The beta was a few weeks before the game launched so clearly was never going to change the code of the game on release.
3. The beta code for BF4 actually felt more stable than the retail game on release. It wasn't optimised as much so performance was (in my case) choppier, but it didn't have the crashing issues or netcode issues experienced when the game was released properly.
4. Many issues identified in the beta (or indeed reported in the previous iteration of the game) are never addressed or even acknowledged, which doesn't exactly inspire players.

This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "Quercus" (Jan 14th 2014, 2:40pm)


Witchalok

Grounded in reality

(301)

Posts: 945

Date of registration
: Mar 6th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Bucharest - Romania

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

16

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 2:25pm

Okay, I'm going to give you guys a clue because you have none (although Symthic is generally not so clueless as some other forums I could mention).

......

Conclusion: Complaining that Battlefield has bugs at launch that 'makes it unplayable', which may be true for some people, and that EA are shit, the developers don't care and that you aren't going to buy another Battlefield game makes you sound like a whiny, over-privileged, clueless fuck. If I was an EA developer, I would be glad to see the back of you. If you want Battlefield to be better, participate in the Beta, provide bug and crash reports and show some fucking respect.

It still crashes - so what? There will be patches, it will get better.


Simply put, EA is shit. There is no doubt about that.
If it weren't shit, there wouldn't be all of this hate towards them.
Of course I am talking about EA the publisher, and not EA the developer (DICE). They got greedy, they decided to ship early, and they delivered a sub-par product. They deserve the hate that they receive.
DICE is a different story, although they are showing a complete lack of respect towards us (see the "how is the game?" tweet from Zhint0).
If they don't "fucking respect" us why should we "fucking respect" them.

The biggest advice that I can give to any player who is disgruntled with the state of the game is to "vote with your wallet". If you are unhappy with the game, ask for a refund and refuse to purchase future titles.
To claim that people are "whiny, over-privileged, clueless fucks" when they regret paying hard earned money for a broken product is a gross over-exaggeration.

In regards to the beta, it was clear to everybody that it was at best a network stress test (IANA software developer) or at worst a "demo". A lot of bugs were reported in the beta and they made it all the way through to present day.

And if you watched the video, you will see that the "There will be patches, it will get better" mentality is largely to blame for the current status of a lot of games today.
Ship a defective product, fix it with a year's worth of patches.
All I am saying (in my previous post as well) is to buy the product when it is finished. BF5 will no longer be a Day 1 purchase for me. I will wait for the patches and the price drops.
In the end, this will be a lose-lose. EA will lose most of my money and I will lose time not playing a complete game.

L.E.

Since you are a software developer, could you please answer these questions:
1. I would much rather have a solid game-play experience than all of the bells and whistles. Why didn't DICE dial down on the destruction and other aspects of the game and increase the "tick" rate? I do not claim to fully understand the tick rate controversy, but why can't we have 100Hz tick rate in 16/24 player TDM and Domination servers and 10 Hz tick rate in 64 man large conquest servers? Overall we would have a much better infantry experience.
2. Aren't different people in the different departments in charge of different issues? Why is taking so long for balance changes? They changed the fire rate on the AK12 from 1000 to 750 RPM for the purpose of keeping it from being overpowered but they forgot to do the same thing to the AKU-12.

This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "Witchalok" (Jan 14th 2014, 2:37pm)


17

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 2:47pm

Ohh this video again, I agree with some of his points. others I don't. But mainly I'm sick of seeing the same video posted over and over as if it's gospel truth, no offence to the guy, but it's an uneducated opinion that some people agree with while trying to rationalise their anger over BF4, a lot of that anger I feel is part of the 'band wagon' effect.

Maybe I'm on of the lucky ones and my game has run very good since I got it, apart from the obvious bugs, but I'll stick with it. I didn't pre-order it as I felt there was no need , it's not like a triple A title is going to run out in the stores, but for the people saying don't pay for unfinished products, where does this attitude fit in with crowd funded games? they after all aren't even made.

Witchalok

Grounded in reality

(301)

Posts: 945

Date of registration
: Mar 6th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Bucharest - Romania

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

18

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 3:03pm

Ohh this video again, I agree with some of his points. others I don't. But mainly I'm sick of seeing the same video posted over and over as if it's gospel truth, no offence to the guy, but it's an uneducated opinion that some people agree with while trying to rationalise their anger over BF4, a lot of that anger I feel is part of the 'band wagon' effect.

Maybe I'm on of the lucky ones and my game has run very good since I got it, apart from the obvious bugs, but I'll stick with it. I didn't pre-order it as I felt there was no need , it's not like a triple A title is going to run out in the stores, but for the people saying don't pay for unfinished products, where does this attitude fit in with crowd funded games? they after all aren't even made.


The game runs quite fine for me, it didn't crash after almost every match like it happened to some friends. However the not able to join server issues was a real nerve wrecker.

In regards to crow funded games: these games are probably not going to be made otherwise. Look at Shadowrun Returns. Isometric turn based RPGs are pretty much dead. Their time has come and gone. However there are still people who would play them, but big developers think that there aren't any profits to be made. So unless you can get the cash to make the game up-front (crowd source) then probably you will unable to release such a game.

Or in the case of some developers (I can't remember right now the name of the guy who made Grim Fandango), they are very well known, and people are confident that he will release a quality product. By crowd sourcing it, he gets to have the final say in the game design. There will be no publishers who will push him to go with one direction or another.

In the case of crowd funded games, if you don't "pre-order" then you can't talk about "going to run out in the stores" because without your pre-order the game will never be made.

Posts: 265

Date of registration
: Apr 30th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

19

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 3:42pm

In regards to crow funded games: these games are probably not going to be made otherwise.

Crow funded? That sounds like it would be murder to try getting those off the ground.

I'll get my coat.

Posts: 83

Date of registration
: Jan 1st 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Minnesota

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

20

Tuesday, January 14th 2014, 3:47pm

I would like to say that I don't know any technical crap but when I first poster on this thread I was caught up in hate hype , but after what I read from verse If u compare it to say gutting your first deer the deer being the game The new engine being the first time also with the new consoles adds more problems . Think about it. Millions of people trying to play at one time there will be bugs


Give them a break
Yes I am from Minnasota ,and No I don't say eh