Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #61
    Well, of course I want a bug free game as much as possible. It simply doesn't "break the game", to use a vulgar expression, for many players.
    Does something have to break the game for many players before BioWare will address it?

    Many game issues from a technical standpoint, don't hit every player of that game. No matter how vocal the forums are over that issue. All Darth xxDarthRevanxx knows is he is having a blast playing TOR.
    That great, but when is an issue going to be important enough to address and fix? 5 months before the game launches? 1 month before launch? 1 month post launch? 6 months post launch? I don't think the number of people experiencing an issue is relevant to the severity of the issue or the desire to fix it.

    It's unreasonable to ever expect MMOs to have zero technical issues. It happens. As long as it doesn't effect the majority of the players in a way that prevents actual play-- it's fine.
    The problem isn't that a new MMO has technical issues. The problem is that the technical issues have been present for months, were present during stress testing before the game went live, were present after the game went live, and are still present 3 weeks later.

    Again, many people aren't taking issues with the fact games launch with bugs or other problems. Instead, they are taking issue with the fact that most of these problems existed during the beta and have yet to be addressed. How much more time will pass before Bio Ware decides to fix things?
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    All I do in any game I play is pvp. On top of that, I have higher than average ratings in the games I play. Like I said before, in the context of team play and map design, both games are balanced. You can disagree with that all you want to, but it's a fact.
    Play an enhancement shaman, moonkin, not-frost-mage, ret pala, warrior in high arena ratings. Come tell me PVP is very well balanced.
    Face it, some classes have been at top for whole expansions. Some others have been sub-par the whole expansion. It's not normal that on my server, i'm the best rated enhancement shaman at..... 1800.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    If you think that I hate Tor, you obviously don't get it. If you think that trolling/flaming me is a good way to make a point, go for it.


    No one said Blizzard is perfect. What WAS said is that Blizzard is setting the standard these days with their games. Standards for quality, content, and entertainment value.
    You heard it here folks, anyone who disagrees even slightly with this guy is trolling/flaming. I call checkmate.

    Also, you're wrong about Activision-Blizzard setting a standard, as I said earlier. A lack of balance in Starcraft II PvP and World of Warcraft PvP is not a good standard. As I said, they have quality products, but they are not a standard to live up to when their PvP in both titles is broken to all hell and back. When something is broken, you fix it. Unless Heart of the Swarm fixes something, Starcraft II PvP has been broken for a year now, and World of Warcrafts for much longer.

    Considering you said you play both, and live by higher standards, one would hope you would not be so blind to the truth. It is a shame.

  4. #64
    If you want a bug free game there is umm... well... and then there is ... ummm no, oh wait theres mineswe... nope... umm solitaire.

    There are a few reasons you don't notice it as much in single player games then MMOs. Reason 1 being that your communicating with tons of other people and when you get a bug you realize 10,000 others have it, while single player you run into a bug its oh happened on time probably just my computer glitched. And reason 2 with constantly changing code fixing one thing often breaks another thing, so as they fix certain bugs new ones are created, since your getting the updates as they go you notice all these issues while as single player ones those builds are often house builds only and when/if they release an update its normaly a long time between where they don't have to keep people intisted(sorry spelling) like you do the MMO market.

    Point is the more changes you make to your code more frequently the more bugs you create fixing other ones and the more people you are conversing with about said bug the more they are amplified then having it happen to just you here and there single player... Looking at bugs in a single player game you look at them yourself through dark sun glasses, looking at them in an MMO you have a team of people looking at them under a microscope with bright lighting. Its not that there are more bugs per say its that your looking at them more carefully.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by Diop View Post
    The highlighted quote I strongly disagree with because there are very good legitimate reasons why a class should be nerfed instead of buffing all the others. The first is that it's often just plain easier, if one class is doing 110% of the rest who are all within 5% of each other, why risk causing more imbalance by buffing the rest instead of just nerfing that one class. Secondly there's the PVE game to consider, if a boss's health and enrage timer is based around classes doing 100% damage but you buff them all to 110% you nerf that content when that may not be desired. Finally it's not as simple as just buffing all the classes anyway, if you increased damage across the board you risk making burst classes more potent and might have to nerf their mobility or utility to keep them from being overpowered.

    No one likes being nerfed, I get that, but refusing to ever nerf would be an incredibly poor design choice.
    1) first no where in my statement did i state the ratio of "buffed" classes to "weaker" classes, so what if there are only 2 left to be buffed out of 10, is it easier to nerf 8 than to buff 2? 2) all of that is just a numbers issue which is very easy to fix, if a groups DPS increases by X% buff content by Y% to compensate or w/e. 3) with that logic then nothing should ever be changed from release as it would cause the devs to actually have to work at balancing things. you are probably the type of person who complained when feral druids got buffs going into TBC, even though it was the worst build by a mile in Vanilla WoW!
    Cherish the quiet...before my STORM!!!

    Guild Wars 2: Odeezee (Necromancer) || TERA: Odeezee (Archer-Ret) || SWTOR: Odeezee (Sith Inquisitor-Ret/Jedi Sage-Ret) || GW: Odeezee Fosho (Elementalist-Ret)
    Aion: Odeezee (Sorcerer-Ret), ODZ (Spirit Master-Ret) || War
    : Odeezee (Sorcerer-Ret) || AoC: Odeezee (Demonologist-Ret) || WoW: Odeezee (Druid-Ret), Thaone (Mage-Ret)

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    Does something have to break the game for many players before BioWare will address it?
    They are addressing it. There were dev posts on many concerns of the game.

    I get that all issues are not fixed at the moment. But that's life.

    That great, but when is an issue going to be important enough to address and fix? 5 months before the game launches? 1 month before launch? 1 month post launch? 6 months post launch? I don't think the number of people experiencing an issue is relevant to the severity of the issue or the desire to fix it.
    I was there for testing. Not weekender stuff. I was in the alpha & flashpoint/operations testing. Saw several overhauls and revisions to the game as they pushed out new systems- from skills to stat modeling to textures. Despite this, not everything will be caught or worked out by release. There is a hierarchy to these things.

    How much more time will pass before Bio Ware decides to fix things?
    Certainly more than 3 weeks.

    It's been less a month TOR has been on the market to the masses. Totally unreasonable to expect development to catch all potential issues with an MMO. Like it or not, one will be waiting till oblivion for an MMO to ship that has no complaints technical or otherwise.

    "Mostly playable" is an achievable goal. Companies will continue to shoot for that rather than some idea of "perfection".

  7. #67
    pvp will never be 'balanced' in any game because different players will be better then anyone at any time and expected pvp to magically become balanced in any game mmo fps etc is just being deusional

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Odeezee View Post
    1) first no where in my statement did i state the ratio of "buffed" classes to "weaker" classes, so what if there are only 2 left to be buffed out of 10, is it easier to nerf 8 than to buff 2? 2) all of that is just a numbers issue which is very easy to fix, if a groups DPS increases by X% buff content by Y% to compensate or w/e. 3) with that logic then nothing should ever be changed from release as it would cause the devs to actually have to work at balancing things. you are probably the type of person who complained when feral druids got buffs going into TBC, even though it was the worst build by a mile in Vanilla WoW!
    1) I've never seen a post, where a class or spec is at the lower end of the scale, behind the majority of the classes where the person has said "They should nerf all the other classes" Yeah, theoretically if someone did say "hey, nerf 80% of the other classes" I would suggest just buffing the other class. However you weren't really talking about hypothetical situations, you were talking about posts you'd actually seen and generally people only call for nerfs to the top specs/classes and call for buffs to the bottom ones.

    2) I don't think it's as simple as you make it out to be.

    3) My logic is that devs should use all tools to try to achieve balance and that includes both buffing and nerfing skills/specs/classes. Again merely choosing to always raise people to the highest end of the spectrum makes balance harder than if you can look at the thing as a whole and choose to buff or nerf as appropiate. I'm glad that the joke specs of vanilla have all been buffed to the point that they're all pretty much viable, I really don't know where you got that whole feral druid thing from but it seems like a chip on your shoulder, however I'm also glad that when Rogues were doing 25% more damage than the other specs in the launch of 3.3 that Blizzard chose to nerf them back to the other classes level than give everyone a 25% buff and cause mayhem for everyone in raiding, bgs and arena.

    All I'm saying is, why do you believe it's wrong to ever ask for a nerf to another class?
    "Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence...When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - C. S. Lewis

  9. #69
    Scarab Lord Roose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Tuscaloosa
    Posts
    4,945
    Quote Originally Posted by Mif View Post
    The reason they do it, is they can get away with it.
    The reason they get away with it, is that fanboys will defend anything.
    It really is this simple. Games are rushed out to try and please the shareholders. Simple as that. No money in beta testing.

    After further reading this thread, I am even more confused why I received an infraction.

  10. #70
    You heard it here folks, anyone who disagrees even slightly with this guy is trolling/flaming. I call checkmate.
    So reading your post to me, noticing that it has flammatory and offensive language, I'm incorrect in stating that you're trying to troll/flame me?

    Also, you're wrong about Activision-Blizzard setting a standard, as I said earlier. A lack of balance in Starcraft II PvP and World of Warcraft PvP is not a good standard. As I said, they have quality products, but they are not a standard to live up to when their PvP in both titles is broken to all hell and back. When something is broken, you fix it. Unless Heart of the Swarm fixes something, Starcraft II PvP has been broken for a year now, and World of Warcrafts for much longer.

    Considering you said you play both, and live by higher standards, one would hope you would not be so blind to the truth. It is a shame.
    Or it could be that you're one of those types of people who think that you should be able to walk into BGs as any class/spec and solo your way to victory, getting pissed and calling the game broken, when you can't. It's all becoming clear now, you're opinion is skewed by some tragic set of extraordinary circumstances.

    Play an enhancement shaman, moonkin, not-frost-mage, ret pala, warrior in high arena ratings. Come tell me PVP is very well balanced.
    Face it, some classes have been at top for whole expansions. Some others have been sub-par the whole expansion. It's not normal that on my server, i'm the best rated enhancement shaman at..... 1800.
    Every one of those specs is not only viable, but has at least some arena representation beyond 1800. Not only that, but all of them are viable in rated BGs too. Not everything revolves around arena.

    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/arena/da...20Cleave%20II/

    You can look up more yourself

    http://www.arenajunkies.com/rankings/3v3/
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    Every one of those specs is not only viable, but has at least some arena representation beyond 1800. Not only that, but all of them are viable in rated BGs too. Not everything revolves around arena.
    So, the first warrior is in the 37th arena team. Second? 71th. Third, 75th. Thats three warriors in the top 100 teams, or top 300 players. While there statistically should be 30 warriors, there are 3, or 1% of the players.

    On the other hand, there are 48 rogues and 46 warlocks in that same top 100. That means 16% and 15.33% of the players.

    So, in the top 100, there are 16 TIMES the amount of rogues than there are warriors. Completely balanced classes, right?

    Edit: looks like the list on arenajunkies stops at 90, so make that top100, top90. The relative numbers of warriors-->rest do stay the same, though.

  12. #72
    Complaining about something that is so complicated and difficult to achieve(game development), shows an incredible lack of respect/knowledge for the process.
    Throwing terms like "poorly designed" around so effortlessly...its sad.
    A game that takes 4 years to make(for example).....doesn't mean its been refined for 4 years. Things are changed and introduced into the game at the very last second. And ALL the work and polish that may have been done before, now has to be redone with far less time.
    These people bust their asses off to make something great...most of them anyway.
    IT will be imperfect about 80% of the time...
    Deal with it.
    How do you deal with it?
    By not complaining about it.
    It'll get better, it always does.
    All you do by bringing it up is showing how little appreciation you have for things you don't understand.

  13. #73
    So reading your post to me, noticing that it has flammatory and offensive language, I'm incorrect in stating that you're trying to troll/flame me?
    You must be right! After all, you've been proven wrong on multiple occasions about the PvP, and you are still acting high and mighty and right!

    Or it could be that you're one of those types of people who think that you should be able to walk into BGs as any class/spec and solo your way to victory, getting pissed and calling the game broken, when you can't. It's all becoming clear now, you're opinion is skewed by some tragic set of extraordinary circumstances.
    Actually, I do not play World of Warcraft at all any longer, and have not for quite some time, I've also held a gold ranking in Starcraft II before. Clearly though, I have no experience with the latter, and clearly Activision-Blizzard has not said that Starcraft II PvP IS unbalanced, and clearly all the users who have spoken against you on WoW PvP, not to mention to proof from all the top ranking PvPers admitting how broken it is, proves that you, the minority who shouts loudly enough, MUST be right!

    Keep it up man, I'm cracking up at how much of a high opinion you have of yourself. I admit time and time again that Activision-Blizzard does have quality products, but they are not the standard you make them out to be, but just because I disagree with you on that fact, you lose it and go on these big rants as to how I'm wrong and you are right. Starcraft II and WoW both have PvP, and when your PvP is as unbalanced as both those games, it does NOT make for a quality product. This is fact, and you my friend, are wrong. Perhaps it is your OPINION that Activision-Blizzard is setting the standard, but it is absolutely not fact.

    You want an actual opinion, and NOT a fact? WoW PvP is like extreme rock, paper, scissors. Match the right comp and win the game, with lots of interupts and stunlocks. What isn't an opinion, is that Activision-Blizzard has unbalanced PvP for both World of Warcraft and Starcraft II, making them not a standard of quality, but a hilarious example on how long PvP can go unbalanced, not change, and people still stick around.

  14. #74
    A Challenger! and Eroginous, play nice.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by sarasun View Post
    So, the first warrior is in the 37th arena team. Second? 71th. Third, 75th. Thats three warriors in the top 100 teams, or top 300 players. While there statistically should be 30 warriors, there are 3, or 1% of the players.

    On the other hand, there are 48 rogues and 46 warlocks in that same top 100. That means 16% and 15.33% of the players.

    So, in the top 100, there are 16 TIMES the amount of rogues than there are warriors. Completely balanced classes, right?

    Edit: looks like the list on arenajunkies stops at 90, so make that top100, top90. The relative numbers of warriors-->rest do stay the same, though.
    Are you trying to make a point that the representation isn't balanced? Cuz yeah, there is such a thing as FOTM classes and comps. Just because all classes aren't represented equally in rated pvp, doesn't mean that there is a glaring imbalance in viability. The flip side of this conversation is that there is more to rated pvp than just arena.

    Looking at the top rated BGs teams, there is a healthy mix of all classes and specs to be found. Keep in mind that you're looking at the TOP players, which makes up for a small fraction of the total players. The point is that the specs and classes you mentioned are perfectly viable in rated pvp. If you want to play a ret paladin, you can, and you can go pretty far. Same with playing a warrior, or a non frost specced mage. Or an enhance shaman. Picking any of those specs/classes will not bar you from doing well in pvp.

    http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/characte.../Swack/pvp#bgs #2 rated player in rated BGs, an arms warrior.

    http://www.arenajunkies.com/rankings/battleground/
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Eroginous View Post
    Are you trying to make a point that the representation isn't balanced? Cuz yeah, there is such a thing as FOTM classes and comps. Just because all classes aren't represented equally in rated pvp, doesn't mean that there is a glaring imbalance in viability. The flip side of this conversation is that there is more to rated pvp than just arena.
    Let's look at 2200+. We're not looking at the TOP players here, just high level players.

    These also include RBGs
    http://www.worldofwargraphs.com/stat...0---0-0-0.html
    http://www.worldofwargraphs.com/stat...0---0-0-0.html

    This happens as soon as you get into ratings that mean something. Some classes are just plain better. I agree that's it's practically impossible to balance 30 specs for PVP in the game. It's normal that, at a given time, some specs are better than others. But after a few patches/expansions, it should all round up. Everyone has been top, everyone has been "low-pack". Tell me the last time rogues were not top in PVP.

    Oh, my god. We derailed from the subject. Alot. Sorry for everyone actually caring about the thread.

    As far as I know, Blizzard did a fine job balancing their classes. Is it balanced? no. But it's not as worse as many other games out there

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by sarasun View Post
    Let's look at 2200+. We're not looking at the TOP players here, just high level players.

    These also include RBGs
    http://www.worldofwargraphs.com/stat...0---0-0-0.html
    http://www.worldofwargraphs.com/stat...0---0-0-0.html

    This happens as soon as you get into ratings that mean something. Some classes are just plain better. I agree that's it's practically impossible to balance 30 specs for PVP in the game. It's normal that, at a given time, some specs are better than others. But after a few patches/expansions, it should all round up. Everyone has been top, everyone has been "low-pack". Tell me the last time rogues were not top in PVP.

    Oh, my god. We derailed from the subject. Alot. Sorry for everyone actually caring about the thread.

    As far as I know, Blizzard did a fine job balancing their classes. Is it balanced? no. But it's not as worse as many other games out there
    That still doesn't prove that certain classes and specs are complete trash in pvp, as a couple people here have suggested. Do people tend to gravitate towards particular classes? Sure. Does that indicate that pvp is imbalanced? Nope.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jevlin
    Why? Because fuck you, that's why.

    Every time you have a question that begins with "Why?" that is about what other people prefer to do with their own goddamn time, come back here, and reread the first row of this post. That will ALWAYS be the answer to your question. Have a nice day.

  18. #78
    That's it, no more discussion about WoW PvP representation. There's a PvP forum for that. Next person to continue the discussion gets an infraction.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Laik View Post
    Complaining about something that is so complicated and difficult to achieve(game development), shows an incredible lack of respect/knowledge for the process.

    I've been doing game development as a hobby for about 6 years now, never assume.

    Throwing terms like "poorly designed" around so effortlessly...its sad.

    When something is poorly designed it is evident to anyone who doesn't just blindly accept what is shown to them.

    A game that takes 4 years to make(for example).....doesn't mean its been refined for 4 years. Things are changed and introduced into the game at the very last second. And ALL the work and polish that may have been done before, now has to be redone with far less time.

    Bug fixes, balances, and polish are worked on in the last month or so, if you're going down to the wire as a dev while still working on major features you're in for a world of hurt.


    These people bust their asses off to make something great...most of them anyway.

    I don't disagree.

    IT will be imperfect about 80% of the time...

    Nothing is perfect, but you go into games expecting broken features or poorly designed ones?

    Deal with it.

    So you sit there and just take it when a developer releases a product that is full of poorly designed features and THEN hand them more money every month telling them that you're perfectly fine with this?

    How do you deal with it?
    By not complaining about it.


    So you sit there and just take it when a developer releases a product that is full of poorly designed features and THEN hand them more money every month telling them that you're perfectly fine with this?

    It'll get better, it always does.

    Most MMO devs will never swallow their pride and admit they messed up or designed something so poorly that it's hard to comprehend how it's even possible that anyone A) Thought of it and B) People agreed and implemented it. If things DO get fixed you're looking at many months to years when they had ~5 years to design it right in the first place. Sadly, nearly every MMO dev is bound by a strict deadline with their publisher looming nearby and forces them to throw it out the door, regardless of the current state.


    All you do by bringing it up is showing how little appreciation you have for things you don't understand.

    I've been doing game development as a hobby for about 6 years now, never assume.



    Also, imagine a group of engineers over at Toyota were designing a car and they released it about 80% finished and things that were there are randomly broken in ways that you simply can't understand how this possibly got a green light in the early planning phases. Would you buy this car or support this company? No, you wouldn't. There are many similar analogies that can be made, but the point is why accept them for MMOs when you wouldn't accept them in other game genres nor other areas of your life?

    When you pick up and play any game, you're never supposed to be taken out of the game by thinking "Ugh this doesn't work as it's supposed to or I have to fix this because the game doesn't do what it's supposed to". That is poor design and is not debatable. You are NEVER supposed to fight with a game, period. As I've said I fully expect to run into bugs here and there, but what I don't expect to run into is something in a game that jolts you right out of the experience because it simply doesn't work or the usability of said feature is so poorly designed that it becomes frustrating.
    Last edited by omlech; 2012-01-16 at 02:29 PM.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by A Challenger! View Post
    I used to feel the same way with the classes I play (Sith Warrior and Operative), but I have experienced the delay bug from time to time. Oddly, it seems to operate like a memory leak. I encounter it in some locations, and not others. It isn't enough to make me quit, but I do understand the anger and criticism that is garnered from it.
    I never noticed this issue either in SW:TOR till I started button spamming, and that's when it started occuring. As a result I barely have this problem on my Jedi Sage healer, but I do notice it at times on my Jedi Guardian tank. I think it's annoying but in my case not really deal breaking; I'm also fairly certain that this issue will be fixed by BioWare.

    Part of the problem as Eroginous pounted out is that abilities are restricted by their animation. This poses a problem with Alacrity. How do you speed up things when they are bound by the duration of the animation regardless? Speed up the animation? Or just cut off the animation like WoW does. While SW:TOR combat plays out very realistically with attacks and counter attacks the most likely way forward however is to do it WoW style, and cut off animations for the sake of gameplay.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •