Update "circle" choice for PC Userbase, create an audience willing to experience bugs before the rest are exposed

[nalsur10]

So, I haven't had as much fun with Warframe since the release of the Liches.

I created one, had it steal my stuff for a while and then I felt obligated to kill it to prevent that from happening anymore. Converting it seemed like something I might like, but it's not available for bringing into our ships yet. Getting a new weapon and requiring the multi-forma method to gain mastery isn't very fun for me.

 

 Empyrean I was really excited about, but we'll see after the new bug fixes are implemented.

 

The game has such a huge grind-wall implemented into it and maybe not enough story yet, that's something that's big for me, it keeps me coming back, the grind does not.

 

I think a big issue is how updates are implemented, right now the PC userbase experiences all of the bugs first before anyone that has a console does, sometimes out of frustration, things are posted here after huge losses due to bugs, or experiences that haven't been "fine tuned" so that the majority of users are satisfied. I don't think the entire PC userbase wants to be a guinea pig for new updates. I don't think this is the way it should be, maybe someone at DE has probably thought of this, but partitioning your audience into the people that are open and willing to accept all of the bugs that come with sometimes game-breaking bugs.

 

What are your thoughts on this everyone? We don't currently have a choice in receiving new updates, and with the last few updates I can no longer assume they're actually ready for us to experience since we are expected to submit feedback here on the forums whenever we think something should change and hope it gains enough attention for it to be mentioned on a devstream maybe, or that a dev replies directly.

 

[Lightel03]

The fact that DE is releasing content in such an unpolished state really makes me worry for the future of WF.

Though releasing it like this to the public might have an upside to it: since you have the entire PC playbase testing the game for you, bug reports will come in by the hundreds, and therefore bug fixes will follow, making the overall bug fixing process much faster and shorter. But then again, that will come at the cost of the respect that the playerbase had in the developer.

When they released Railjack, they sure didn`t mention that there would be a huge amount of softlocks, game breaking glitches, bugs that erase all previous mission progress, and many others. They released it in such a bad state, that it just makes the consumer question if the developer even has good intentions. And because of that, DE has lost many supporters, and will probably continue to do so until they show themselves to be deserving once again of our trust.

Until then we just have to hang in there, either that or drop the game and find something better. And tbh, after 2019, I`m not far off from doing that last one.

[kapn655321]

While I like the idea, there are a few things to consider:

The context of what we expect has changed, when considering the game we have thus far.
After being in development for nearly 10 years, our expectation for quality is perhaps beginning to outpace the rate at which they plan to work.
We have a larger pool of things to point to in the game as being better examples of their capacity. "Let's have more like that," however, might not consider that such examples could have been slowly refined over 4+ years when they have time, funding etc.. We now expect that quality consistently every few weeks; regardless of intention and attempts, that may not be possible for what they're comfortable in doing as a company, which brings my to my next point.

Updates average at 3 week intervals to keep players engaged.
This method has been successful and instrumental in their survival as a company for many years.
When their business started, it was expected impossible to offer what they intended.
Seriously, they were warned by other minds in their sector that players wouldn't go for it; it's only because we have, that Warframe has been possible.

The longer they spend on an update before it's released, the further into, "points of no return," they go with new content.
As with the Lich, many aspects of how it functions were changed post launch. (Not all, granted, but several changes were made.)
They might hit a point in development where they need help learning how bugs work, and send it our way to learn what we can..
We must consider, how they wish to manage/pace their company for their own sake.
The only way to fund and manage things is to keep people as close to their model as possible, so players did not feel left out. (Even when they still do. People are needy.)
Players feel simultaneously that we already have, "no content," and want DE to wait longer for updates.
The best balance they've been able to strike is by doing exactly as they are doing.

I know that many players feel that, by following the trends the player base sets for it, that they'll be better off for it.
You remember BioWare, though? We demanded Better/Faster, and EA demanded they deliver... to the point they went belly up.
I'm well aware that my perspective does not satisfy everyone, and we're all welcome to disagree.
It's my understanding that they're not fools, trying to deliver a janky mess of an experience.
The result we have is the reality of what it takes, and that these things are often just imperfect, and that's how it is.
While I'm not opposed to opting out of bugged updates, it will also create one more turn around deadline on when things are expected perfect.
Updates could take an additional 3 weeks or more, rather than 2 days to 1 week that way. Even the fixes need to be tested.
If our player base would stay around for that, perhaps they could, but we've proven before that we don't.

This is a model that, while imperfect and clumsy, is something they themselves feel capable of managing, and gets DE a result that allows them to continue.
The more refined that gets, the more bloodless and corporate it becomes. I'd assume it's already devilishly so as is. They started off very indie, and that's how they want to do it. We're welcome to experience that for free, and it does work for what it is. That's not nothin'. It's their baby first and foremost, and the closer they can run it as such, the more satisfying the work is for them as people. The less of that they get, the more it sucks the fun out of the work. Too many good companies have folded under the pressure of the players to be perfect.. which means I have more hope for the future of Warframe and DE, if they take a more casual metered approach as they have all this time already.

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by kapn655321

[nalsur10]

23 minutes ago, kapn655321 said:

While I like the idea, there are a few things to consider:

The context of what we expect has changed, when considering the game we have thus far.
After being in development for nearly 10 years, our expectation for quality is perhaps beginning to outpace the rate at which they plan to work.
We have a larger pool of things to point to in the game as being better examples of their capacity. "Let's have more like that," however, might not consider that such examples could have been slowly refined over 4+ years when they have time, funding etc.. We now expect that quality consistently every few weeks; regardless of intention and attempts, that may not be possible for what they're comfortable in doing as a company, which brings my to my next point.

Updates average at 3 week intervals to keep players engaged.
This method has been successful and instrumental in their survival as a company for many years.
When their business started, it was expected impossible to offer what they intended.
Seriously, they were warned by other minds in their sector that players wouldn't go for it; it's only because we have, that Warframe has been possible.

The longer they spend on an update before it's released, the further into, "points of no return," they go with new content.
As with the Lich, many aspects of how it functions were changed post launch. (Not all, granted, but several changes were made.)
They might hit a point in development where they need help learning how bugs work, and send it our way to learn what we can..
We must consider, how they wish to manage/pace their company for their own sake.
The only way to fund and manage things is to keep people as close to their model as possible, so players did not feel left out. (Even when they still do. People are needy.)
Players feel simultaneously that we already have, "no content," and want DE to wait longer for updates.
The best balance they've been able to strike is by doing exactly as they are doing.

I know that many players feel that, by following the trends the player base sets for it, that they'll be better off for it.
You remember BioWare, though? We demanded Better/Faster, and EA demanded they deliver... to the point they went belly up.
I'm well aware that my perspective does not satisfy everyone, and we're all welcome to disagree.
It's my understanding that they're not fools, trying to deliver a janky mess of an experience.
The result we have is the reality of what it takes, and that these things are often just imperfect, and that's how it is.
While I'm not opposed to opting out of bugged updates, it will also create one more turn around deadline on when things are expected perfect.
Updates could take an additional 3 weeks or more, rather than 2 days to 1 week that way. Even the fixes need to be tested.
If our player base would stay around for that, perhaps they could, but we've proven before that we don't.

This is a model that, while imperfect and clumsy, is something they themselves feel capable of managing, and gets DE a result that allows them to continue.
The more refined that gets, the more bloodless and corporate it becomes. I'd assume it's already devilishly so as is. They started off very indie, and that's how they want to do it. We're welcome to experience that for free, and it does work for what it is. That's not nothin'. It's their baby first and foremost, and the closer they can run it as such, the more satisfying the work is for them as people. The less of that they get, the more it sucks the fun out of the work. Too many good companies have folded under the pressure of the players to be perfect.. which means I have more hope for the future of Warframe and DE, if they take a more casual metered approach as they have all this time already.

 

I must say I am really thankful and appreciate your well-thought-out response. I suppose taking all of those things into account, I'll just take a back seat and try to enjoy playing with friends while I alternate towards other games in the meantime during those periods where I can't quite bring myself to willingly expose myself to certain areas of Warframe.

 

I suppose as a player the least I'll continue to do from now on is just be one of those hundreds of players that supports and posts actively the bugs that are making the game less enjoyable.

 

In regards to BioWare, I remember the name but not what was happening with it.

 

 Something I wanted to mention is that Warframes themselves are a defining factor of the game, and with primes coming out with regular release cycles, what strikes me most is that the history or story of them is only included on a few like Titania, Nidus, Limbo, etc. Those quests helped me get closer to the game and understanding them. That being said I can see there's a lot of reliance on them for continuous funding, and I hope that this is being used to develop the game's story further. Warframes are one way of changing how you play the game, but the story is just the other essential part that keeps me attached to how it all ties in together.

[nalsur10]

1 hour ago, Lightel03 said:

The fact that DE is releasing content in such an unpolished state really makes me worry for the future of WF.

Though releasing it like this to the public might have an upside to it: since you have the entire PC playbase testing the game for you, bug reports will come in by the hundreds, and therefore bug fixes will follow, making the overall bug fixing process much faster and shorter. But then again, that will come at the cost of the respect that the playerbase had in the developer.

When they released Railjack, they sure didn`t mention that there would be a huge amount of softlocks, game breaking glitches, bugs that erase all previous mission progress, and many others. They released it in such a bad state, that it just makes the consumer question if the developer even has good intentions. And because of that, DE has lost many supporters, and will probably continue to do so until they show themselves to be deserving once again of our trust.

Until then we just have to hang in there, either that or drop the game and find something better. And tbh, after 2019, I`m not far off from doing that last one.

I hear ya, I'm really trying to hold on to the last bit of rope here too. I got into it within the last year or so and was excited for what's to come after TennoCon, but it's been rough lately, both for us as players as well as the studio I'm sure.

[kapn655321]

1 hour ago, nalsur10 said:

I suppose taking all of those things into account,

Thanks for reading and responding.

It may be that we see new strategies emerge, as are becoming more apparent in the demand.
I feel players concerns are legitimate, though there isn't much precedent for any game company truly nailing it.
Better a slow year with a few big hitches, than no year at all.

It's possible that we both reasonably and legitimately wish for the product to perform in a way that suits us,
and that we may also have taken some existing improvements for granted, while asking too much at times.
The two are not mutually exclusive, and neither makes the players or the developers truly wrong to want what they want.

I appreciate the consideration, and don't mean in any way to undermine the sentiment.
The game develops much slower than other games, but that's not such a bad thing in the grand scheme of games as a whole.
 

[peterc3]

13 hours ago, Lightel03 said:

When they released Railjack, they sure didn`t mention that there would be a huge amount of softlocks, game breaking glitches, bugs that erase all previous mission progress, and many others.

Yes, they did. You agreed to as much when you started to play the game. You are not playing a finished game.