Strongly disagree. Anthem and CP were very much playable. I only had 1/3rd of the content I tried working. I have multiple minor issues. Some people are stuck in an apex taxi loop. Others have terrible FPS.
Highlights of this thread:
You.. think that there's more good than bad in ED:O? Are you living under a rock or have you not scoured these forums, other forums, reddit, youtube, and reviews of the game? A game that releases with more good experiences than bad experiences does not end up with Fdev having to respond in these forums about the myriad of issues plaguing the majority of the game's base.
Oh, and that one user telling you that you're right, I think you missed his sarcasm.
You have been nitpicking on a single thing for 3pages, and I still have no clue what you are trying to even say. I'm too broad in the positive aspect. I'm not ?
Agree. However, you can still white knight without being a - to those having issues. It's also not just people that bought into the preorder hype having issues, but those that stuck with Horizons (as well as us console folk) are feeling the residual fallout, and not even being able to log in to play Horizons shouldn't qualify me as being salty and/or whining.
The more interesting thing for me is that at some point some lead dev had to look at the changes and merge them in - they got in to the release branch so... someone was ok with all of this weirdness at each point.
It's not like you have much of a choice when your boss tells you to release what you have.
Absolutely. Moving development pieces from dev/test branch into your main is a very deliberate process in the year 2021. Very hard for it to be accidental, but it still should be fairly easy to revert.
In a properly run studio this does not happen, code gets commited into branches - those branches pull request to a lead/senior depending at the time. That lead/senior (or multiple in some cases) code review and functionally test if required. Then it gets merged into the development branch. This development branch then gets tested and once happy it becomes a release so gets merged into the release branch. I am amazed that Frontier (of course I do not know them well apart from they make Elite) would not run like this. If anyone just said 'put it in even if broken' that would be pushed back by the senior developer at the time and production should be on their side 100%.
What do you think happened with Cyberpunk, when the devs said they needed more time ? Management said no. What happened there ? Well, guess.
Cyberpunk was a different story - huge advertising all over, tv, radio, posters, web, magazines etc etc with major pressure not to delay again - this not so much, they could easily have just waited as nobody really outside of the core "Elite" would have any idea. Just frustrating to see the bullshots and then what it turned out to be like.
Lol, who said that, Arthur?
Indeed. Slapping six months more to CP2077 release would've been significant piece of gaming news and certainly completely in a different scale with a DLC updating an existing game. I wonder what kind of figures were at stake in CP2077 release, hundreds of millions?
I'm not angry. I didn't do any hyperbole, if anything you did with the whole "it's a good dlc because I jumped with my srv and shoot a lady". I juts made a list of the issue I had and the thing I liked. Apparently you didn't like that I didn't say it was the best game ever.
I never took you seriously. That's the trick. There was nothing of substance in anything you said so far. You're just there to nitpick on something, turn it into a mountain, and stroke your own ego because you decide "you're right" and someone else is "wrong".
Don't forget the eleven hour migration. Also I think the changes are breaking in many, many places, and irrecoverable. And I'm not talking about simple git revert, I'm talking changes to the APIs, tooling, testing etc...
