Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation



  • Rank
    Gold Eagle

Recent Profile Visitors

2,858 profile views
  1. It'd still have to fetch your in-game data every time a consumer participates in a stream that has a different progression state than they do. While the state itself can be stored locally, connecting to another person it has to do a cross comparison from both accounts to check if there is a mismatch or a match, and then calculate the visibility parameters based on that. On a more pragmatic side it also forms a pattern of something missing and eventually people will normalize that missing pattern being the 2nd dream components at which point its influence is negated. Look, it isn't that the idea is bad technically, but all I am saying is that the solution isn't that simple whatsoever.
  2. While on paper it sounds great, from a technical point it is practically impossible because it would have to have the right to fetch your in-game data when your game is open and must stay open, and then search the particular conditions and cross reference and compare it with the streamers in-game and extension settings. Not to mention those viewers who don't want to use the extension. Yes I am a Software Engineering student, so I am not just pulling the technicality problems from nowhere.
  3. Well yeah you could chalk it up to repetition as well. I did not think of it like that but you are right, that meta-only aspect as well. Warframe thrives on variety, so it is baffling why make a fight where there are little options to choose from to succeed. Failure wouldn't be as bad if it took shorter amount of time, but since it is time consuming as well it is no wonder people feel obligated into narrowly defined meta-boxes.
  4. I used to like them. I don't personally hate them. They just involve so, so much grind. Having already spent several hundreds of hours into content that isn't super exciting burns you out eventually. It isn't the fights I personally dislike, it is the repetition that got me eventually. Now they are just kind of there.
  5. Pretty much no one on the PC side complained on Protea farm when the patch dropped and they are buggiest on launch. Yesterday the update dropped on console and within 12 hours there is already a player complaining how it apparently encourages platinum purchase because you have to farm for it. What would be the problem here? If you are impatient like I am, then why buy it, get what you want and simultaneously support DE's work. Or if that is out of the question then farm it and eventually you will get it. Not every Warframe is designed to be unlocked immediately, some are quicker and easier to get than others.
  6. Why would I ever buy platinum or anything else when I could get 50 platinum in roughly 10-15 minutes. Farm for an hour that would already be anywhere from 150 - 300 platinum. Do that everyday and it'd be 1 080-2 100 platinum each week. Platinum half of the worth of the most expensive Prime Access and Platinum packages. Doing that for 1 hour every day for a year it would be 54 000 - 108 000 platinum, enough to be able to afford most things in the game by simply buying everything and rushing them. And that is just 1 hour each day for 1 year of time. Some play the game for 12 hours each day, that would be 1 800 platinum each day, 648 000 platinum in a year. Even if we cut the platinum amount to 1 per each boss kill, it'd still 30-60 platinum each hour, 210 - 420 platinum each week if only farmed for 1 hour each day, 900 - 1800 platinum each month and 10 800 - 21 600 platinum each year. Prime access packs come by-quarter and contain a bit over 4 000 platinum. At this rate 12 hour farm rate each 3 months it would be 5 400 platinum in the same time period, so more than the pack and entirely free as well. People who buy packs with real money would soon find no reason to buy them beyond collecting cosmetics and DE would see a reduction of their development income to almost a complete null. To then expect the game not to die but continue developing even with 1 platinum prize reward alone is essentially asking the developers to be slaves. Pray tell does this sound realistic to you? Who doesn't like free money, but when you grow old enough you'll learn it doesn't grow on trees. At this moment when you will actually have to work for it you will learn an important life lesson: It is less about what others can do for you, and more about what you can do for others.
  7. I am rewriting my comment as I experienced a 403 error, meaning for some reason the site bloked a youtube link I added under spoiler tag so I will no longer do that and that will end up for viewers responsibility. Anyhow I do believe that we will actually see Man in the Wall in the Duviri Paradox. Warning! For those of you who have not yet finished the Erra cinematic quest, do not look for the spoiler tag and skip what I will write entirely.
  8. I am a Software Engineering student and this was the same thing I said when Brozime suggested this. Dynamic memory allocation and constant calculation with the added risk of data corruption and major performance loss just does not seem particularly feasible and realistic request from a hardware standpoint. On paper and even in theory it all might sound great and harmless, but Brozime isn't a software engineer, it is not unreasonable that he simply does not understand in this case how it would affect gameplay performance. It'd be kind of like trying to play a game while downloading a movie or another game simulatenously. Given the games infrastructure, oh boy all the disconnects, lag, hiccups and the rest.
  9. So target due date this week was true after all: https://www.warframe.com/news/the-deadlock-protocol
  10. New idiom to me but I think I understand. Ecxactly why I stopped. There is enough data to go by without going to technicalities and I think it was going off topic.
  11. 1. Thing is though that bugs don't prioritize based on what effect they have on the game, but based on their replication. Irritating, sure I understand that, but the equation remains the same nonetheless. All it affects is how the testers and game developers will react and prioritize what to fix when the bug is discovered. 2. Irrelevant whether or not they have grown since then when comparing to the numbers at the time then. Would not affect the mathematical equations in any way. Of course any successful company seeks to grow, both in employee numbers since they have more money to employ, and production levels to earn more. None of this post-release function is relevant to the initial one when examined at a certain data point. 3. The key difference is though that Leyou Entertainment is an investor, Sony Interactive Entertainment is a publisher. Publishers invest more money because that is their business model, while investors focus more on investments. Additionally Sony Interactive Entertainment is a sister company to the major Sony itself, which is exactly why God of War series has been PS exclusive. Now if you know anything about technology from televisions, cellphones, consoles to video games, Sony is one of the worlds most profitable companies in existence, while Leyou Entertainment is a rather new indie-game investor company (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leyou). 4.No, you used it as a developer in general and I merely pointed out its relative context when compared to Warframe since you were the one who likened Warframe to a AAA video game company. I also pointed out that in comparison it was a terrible example to pick out of all the examples you could've picked to make your arguments as empirically demonstrated earlier. 5. Refer to my 2nd point. The fact that Santa Monica's their numbers have likely risen a year ago does not matter when we examine what their employee count was between 2014-2018 which the link does give a clear known number of. Your mathematics are also off. Firstly for your assumptions to even work in the first place you would already have to make unsubstantiated assumptions since after all, you do not have any empirical data to back yourself up but merely assuming with simple arithmetic mathematics that do not even logically follow since neither growth nor hiring process is static and expanding at the same rates (heck even the numbers in your comment demonstrate this fact precisely). What is perhaps somewhat counter-intuitive to your own point the link you sourced: https://blog.playstation.com/2020/05/22/inside-the-making-of-warframes-deadlock-protocol/ - also disapproves your mathematics even further and relative close numbers of 20 + 200 is still within the confines of |-x>310<+x| and closer than your assumptions of 350 or even +410 mathematically. 6. Not my problem. They empirically demonstrate my case in real time regardless. 7. Publishers do a lot. They create budget plans, create business relations, make deals, organize venues for marketing, give resources like human staff, monetary resources so for example organization and managerial jobs are in their realm rather than the in-house, equipment acquisition, legalities, licensing and so on an so forth. Having a publisher is a major, major asset for any game developer when it comes to resourcing. Where publishers are terrible for game developer studios is that a lot of publishers do not trust the creative talents of game studios and some of them become greedy for money like Activision or EA. The reason your comparison is so off and poor is that while investors do invest an annual budget, it is a) far less than a publisher does due to different business models, goals and motivations, and b) publishers invest human staff and participate in the development process while investors do not, which necessarily means there will be less developers and resources for development for the same amount of monetary investments. Getting resources isn't only measured in monetary investments, it is also employees, time, proper equipment and so on and so forth. As referring to point 5 and my earlier posts, they demonstrate how your evaluation is simply inaccurate. Frankly though I've demonstrated my case empirically beyond reasonable doubt so thoroughly that it would be redundant to continue at this point anymore.
  12. I figured 11th could be true as well as they could release the update during the show like they did last year. But I have no idea. You got a sauce for that target date?
  13. The last I've heard they were targeting for July 11th but I can neither confirm nor deny that, so best taken with a grain of salt.
  14. Mathematically it doesn't matter because they are already accounted for to begin with since they round up to averages anyway. This is a mathematical trick you can do while retaining accuracy. DE has a Q&A tester team, they have even appeared on livestreams a couple of times. I've already explained how programmers or actually to use the correct terminology how testers are able to identify problems for programmers that they encounter or they get from support bug reports. Key component in any professional testing is test preconditions, isolation, replication, traceability and so on so forth. There is manual testing and then there is automated testing, each serving different purposes and goals in mind. I will only cover their utmost basic short and oversimplified explanations without going into technical details since you'd have to understand programming in general for that: Test preconditions mean that for any test to be performed, the testing environment has to be driven to a certain predefined conditions. For example lets say the game has encountered a bug where a enemy type that spawns only at certain enemy level isn't spawning. To even begin testing obviously the testing environment has to be set to said level. Isolation in testing means that once a bug has been found, the tester will then begin to do what we call as 'stabbing'. Stabbing means the tester is trying to find the exact specifications that the bug exists and this is done by trial and error. What happens, when it happens, how it happens, what causes it, what are its limited parameters (for example if the bug is with a certain equipment, do other equipment share the bug or not) and so on and so forth. Replication. Once the bug has been identified and isolated to the met parameters the bug manifests within, replication in testing is simply the art of performing repeated tests to evaluate how often a bug occurs. This is can be done manually but often times these can also be done trough automated testing, depending on the tested software element or component and the nature of it. Traceability is the ability in testing to be able to observe and detect the communication chain link and track down the from the in-game communication feedback link to the line or lines of code causing the problem. This is how despite code being tens of thousands of lines of code long, a programmer can more easily find and identify the problem and begin to work in a fix for it. These are only some of them but they are some of the most relevant ones so I'll leave it at that. Of course the more people who experience and test a product will be quicker to identify the problem, that was my point. It is simply mathematically impossible for the equation to have any other kind of results and it is exactly why there is no such thing as a bug free game or software. Even the most developed things like Google still have bugs simply because there are so many of them. No offense mate but in the future could you write in English? I am not a native speaker of English either and know nothing about Spanish but utilize google translator if nothing else. I am not saying this simply for convenience and common courtesy but because the User Guideline of the forums is that in the main forum sections every post should be written in English unless the commentator writes to region specific forum subsections. I did not say most AAA developers have more than 1 000, I said they have around 1 000 which means they have approximately 1 000 employees on average. Some bigger studios have even more, some studios less. You bring up the example of Santa Monica. Well first of all Santa Monica has a team size of 300 rather than 200 programmers (Source: https://venturebeat.com/2019/01/04/god-of-war-postmortem-the-making-of-god-of-war/#:~:text=Sony made a big bet,on the PlayStation 4 exclusive.) and they are owned by Sony Interactive Entertainment (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIE_Santa_Monica_Studio), which means they had a publisher and plenty of resources to go by. Not only that but the development of God of War began in 2014 and it was in the development for 4-years (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_War_(2018_video_game)). Further God of War 4 (2018) does not have DLC which always would introduce new mechanics and along with it new bugs, while Warframe releases new content on a relatively frequent basis with the obvious observation that it introduces new bugs even if some old ones are being actively fixed along the way. These two games are probably among the furthest away from one another in terms of examples to use. Destiny would be a more fitting comparison and not because of the mechanical similarities but due to frequent seasonal updates of small content updates. But even there you'll notice it has bugs as well and especially after the studio left Activision publisher. You are going to have to prove your wild and rather sensational claim where from your previous claim of DE having 410 employees, now you even increased the claimed amount of employees DE has to "[...] more than 410 employees [...]" despite me already proving empirically with a source that their studio in total has 310 workers currently. So smack a source or all I can deduce is that claim is hyperbole. In 2014, 61% of the company was sold to Chinese holding company Multi Dynamic, now Leyou, for $73 million. On May 22, 2016 Leyou exercised a call option and now owns 97% of Digital Extremes for a total consideration of $138.2 million US. Lets perform some mathematics again: Avg. = 50 000 000 $ / 6-years = 8 333 333.33333 $/year for the whole company. DE avg. share prior 22nd May 2016 = 8 333 333.33333 $/year * (1-0.61) = 8 333 333.33333 $/year * 0.39 = 3 250 000$/year for the whole company After 22nd May 2016 = 8 333 333.33333 $/year * (1-0.97) = 8 333 333.33333 $/year * 0.03 = 250 000$/year for the whole company Obviously Leyou Entertainment gives some of the money for the development for DE, as DE is in no way developing and testing with as little as maximum of 250 000$/year, but the reason I calculated this is to give context for the fact that main owner always takes the biggest share and when put into proper context those numbers begin to look like quite different quickly. Additional note here is that contextually those numbers are for the totality, not mere development costs themselves. For additional context the base game of Destiny 1 (excludes all DLC) development started in 2010 and lasted for 4-years releasing in 2014. It's in-house development team was over 400 people strong (source: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/destinys-destiny) and while exact numbers of developers is unclear it is estimated they had additional of 300 outsourced developers (source: https://www.vg247.com/2013/07/12/why-ps4-will-alter-the-gaming-landscape-cerny-speaks/). The development of the game costed around 140 000 000 $ to develop (source: https://notices.californiatimes.com/gdpr/latimes.com/), that makes: 140 000 000 $ / 4-years = 35 000 000 $/year, which is even in most charitable calculations minimally: 35 000 000 / 8 333 333.33333 = 4.2 times the amount of monetary resources compared to Warframe each year, and the human resource size of: +700 / 310 = 2.25806451613 times the amount of employees compared to Warframe. So over twice the amount of developers and at least annually 4.2 times the money involved in the development. Games, like any software costs a lot of money but they can also be very profitable if done correctly (or very costly if not). I can understand why on the surface it can be difficult to comprehend how costly development can be and how slow it can be as a whole. Before I started my studies I used to be confused about a lot of things in the game industry as well (or any software in general, I knew so little back then personally). Over the years as I've gained more industry knowledge in general that surface level perception has changed drastically to more accurately reflect the realities of software development as a whole. But as you can already observe here, the differences are drastic. DE is without a doubt a bigger company than most indie developers, that is true and this nature wasn't a contested part at any point, but they do not have a publisher, they only have major shareholders as investors so they still fit the terminology of independent developer since all is done and published from in-house. It is clearly not AAA game studio with a publisher, not by a long shot. It is perhaps a problem of the young industry that is game development, there is little normalized middle ground and you have either-or terminology which are becoming unfitting to only have 2 conceptual dimensions in an industry that is developing into direction where new conceptual terminology could be useful. But going by modern terminology it is still far more of a indie-developer than a AAA game development studio.
  15. Why would I include things that which do not matter for the outcome when we are talking about the amount of time spent testing and the gap in numbers and test results? That numbers by default already round up, it'd be a mathematical error to calculate them again and add them to the result. You do also realize that unlike players, Q&A testers test bugs from multiple angles to find their specifications and create reports that detail everything they were able to find, including but not limited to test preconditions, isolation, replication, traceability and so on so forth. There is manual testing and then there is automated testing, each serving different purposes and goals in mind.
  • Create New...