Frontier, I like you, but you REALLY need longer betas

[CMDR Corlas]

Or maybe a permanent public test server or something. This is kind of silly.

It seems like you use your betas exclusively for bug testing - which I get on the one hand - but it also means that you release updates with some pretty glaring usability issues, because you apparently ignore the issue when raised in beta, presumably because it's not a bug technically. For example, the "Module Cannot Be Used In This Cockpit Mode" message spam. Not a bug, but a clear usability issue that means that, instead of reducing fire-group bloat, the new Combat Mode / Analysis Mode thing actually increases it.

A longer beta period would have given you time to fix that, or a permanent public test server would have identified it ages ago.

Activating the new DSS is another example of this. Or keybinding the "fire probe" button. Or I'm sure several other things that others could name.

Please consider this.

 

[Stealthie]

Uhuh,

Must admit, I didn't notice this during beta but I've just realised that you can't honk at all in cockpit mode.

If you want to go full-nerd, fine.
You enter analysis mode and start twiddling things.

If, OTOH, you just want to honk to get a target location, or the location for a scan or a collection, you've got to enter analysis mode, honk and then exit again.

I get that this is all about enhancing the exploration mechanics but the honk ISN'T just an exploration tool.
It's part of a heap of other gameplay and forcing the player to push 2 more buttons just to update a mission doesn't enhance anything... except my level of irritation.

 

[Andrej]

No they don`t. They can made a year long beta, but still don`t get all the bugs, your suggestion only make already very slow game development much much slower. Bug in the live server have much more pressure that in the beta server, and will get fixed much more quicker.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

One other annoyance I was just reminded of: "Throttle down to use FSS mode". Cool. The one fun thing I could do when long-distance flying in the same system, I'm barred from doing. Neat.

No they don`t. They can made a year long beta, but still don`t get all the bugs, your suggestion only make already very slow game development much much slower. Bug in the live server have much more pressure that in the beta server, and will get fixed much more quicker.

It's not a question of "all the bugs", clearly that's impossible. If you read my post, I wasn't even talking about bugs. I was specifically talking about usability issues that are not bugs.

There's also no reason why a longer public beta period would lead to longer development overall. The beta process can be started earlier, updates can come out in smaller chunks, etc. You clearly don't understand modern software development.

 

[CMDR Corlas]

Is this where there are too many functions for available joystick buttons, so you end up grouping them together?
Would users prefer bigger infrequent updates or quarterly or monthly incremental hotfixes and updates?

Too many buttons that need a "fire" button and not enough fire buttons, so yeah, basically.

For example, if I want to be a good miner and not leave things behind, I need fire buttons for...

1. A mining laser
2. An abrasion blaster
3. A sub-surface displacement missile launcher
4. A seismic charge launcher
5. Collector limpets
6. Prospector limpets
7. A pulse wave analyser
8. A discovery scanner
9. A detailed surface scanner
10. Shield-stripping weapons
11. Anti-armor weapons

11 things, which is six different firegroups. And if I try to double things up a bit to take advantage of the analysis mode / combat mode distinction, the ship complains at me constantly.

I didn't test it yet, but I bet turrets still won't defensive fire in analysis mode too... /sigh

And it's frustrating because so much of this game is SO GOOD!

 

[Stealthie]

One other annoyance I was just reminded of: "Throttle down to use FSS mode". Cool. The one fun thing I could do when long-distance flying in the same system, I'm barred from doing. Neat.

I don't like to be harsh but that, honestly, should have been canned at the earliest design stage.
There would, presumably, have been a meeting where they brainstormed all the things they were going to add into the game and if somebody suggested that deliberately, they should have been told to forget the idea and, conversely, if it was the result of some limitation, they should have been told to go away and find a solution to that limitation.
It genuinely should never have gotten off the ground, one way or the other.

Anybody with the most rudimentary knowledge of the game MUST be aware that the least rewarding part of the game (in terms of credits and gameplay) is long periods in SC.
That being the case, finding something for players to fill that time with should have been top of the to-do list.

If it was a limitation, surely it could have been solved by having the honk take a "snapshot" of the system, then you use the FSS to find an interesting target (or you just head for wherever a mission points you), set a course and then you can go back into the FSS and analyse everything else in the system while you're travelling.
I suspect they probably tried it while a ship was moving and found that manipulating the moving map was too fiddly but, in that case, having the honk provide a static snapshot of the system would solve that issue cos you'd be doing all your FSSing from the POV of wherever you honked.

Alternatively, if it was a deliberate choice, perhaps intended to create gameplay by providing opportunities to ambush CMDRs who're FSSing, the idea should have been shot in the head when it was first suggested.

 

[Sunyavadin]

Welcome to every thread in the beta forum for the last month!

 

[CMDR Corlas]

I suspect they probably tried it while a ship was moving and found that manipulating the moving map was too fiddly but, in that case, having the honk provide a static snapshot of the system would solve that issue cos you'd be doing all your FSSing from the POV of wherever you honked.

My guess is that they tried doing it in a moving ship, but since the FSS mode is likely (behind the scenes) an entirely different theoretical space than the where our ships are being modeled, it was way too much work to get our point-of-view in that space accurately moving, dynamically with our ships as we move.

I explained that poorly.

I never thought of having the honk give a static snapshot of the system, but honestly, I would have called that out as a cheesy explanation if they did it, lol. But I might have been happier with a cheesy explanation and something to do. I am not sure.

 

[metatheurgist]

The mode issue was identified early in beta. Many (good) suggestions were offered, but like most betas a lot of things get overlooked. I suspect this will become a QoL change many updates later.

 

[Mole HD]

The mode issue was identified early in beta. Many (good) suggestions were offered, but like most betas a lot of things get overlooked. I suspect this will become a QoL change many updates later.

Or be completely ignored as usual [yesnod]

"Remember, we really, really value your feedback..."

FDev are becoming more like politicians every day [rolleyes]

 

[CMDR Corlas]

Or be completely ignored as usual [yesnod]

"Remember, we really, really value your feedback..."

FDev are becoming more like politicians every day [rolleyes]

I actually feel like FD is really responsive to user feedback. They just... don't seem to use betas for that, which makes their releases feel a lot clumsier than they need to.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Uhuh,

Must admit, I didn't notice this during beta but I've just realised that you can't honk at all in cockpit mode.

If you want to go full-nerd, fine.
You enter analysis mode and start twiddling things.

If, OTOH, you just want to honk to get a target location, or the location for a scan or a collection, you've got to enter analysis mode, honk and then exit again.

I get that this is all about enhancing the exploration mechanics but the honk ISN'T just an exploration tool.
It's part of a heap of other gameplay and forcing the player to push 2 more buttons just to update a mission doesn't enhance anything... except my level of irritation.

You can definitely still "just honk" in cockpit mode.

Discovery Scanner is still a fire group option.

You don't need to enter Analysis Mode to honk.


edit: Oh, sorry, I see what you mean. Blue analysis HUD mode. I was mistakenly thinking of Full Spectrum Scanner thing.

 

[Rafe Zetter]

Or maybe a permanent public test server or something. This is kind of silly.

It seems like you use your betas exclusively for bug testing - which I get on the one hand - but it also means that you release updates with some pretty glaring usability issues, because you apparently ignore the issue when raised in beta, presumably because it's not a bug technically. For example, the "Module Cannot Be Used In This Cockpit Mode" message spam. Not a bug, but a clear usability issue that means that, instead of reducing fire-group bloat, the new Combat Mode / Analysis Mode thing actually increases it.

A longer beta period would have given you time to fix that, or a permanent public test server would have identified it ages ago.

Activating the new DSS is another example of this. Or keybinding the "fire probe" button. Or I'm sure several other things that others could name.

Please consider this.

OP There's just one problem with your analysis of the situation, you are under the impression that FDev will agree to change course on any single or multiple dev choices as suggested by the players.

Can I refer you to "Exhibit: A" - also known as the DDF - where KS backers paid no small sum to be a part of, only to have almost the ENTIRE body of suggestions and alterations to FDev's proposed dev designs IGNORED

FDev's focussed feedback is just window dressing - this is the third (fourth?) time they have asked for feedback and the third or fourth time feedback on the actual design decisions has been ignored.

Now I'll refer you to "Exhibit: B" - the generally accepted definitions of madness "doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different outcome."

 

[Rafe Zetter]

No they don`t. They can made a year long beta, but still don`t get all the bugs, your suggestion only make already very slow game development much much slower. Bug in the live server have much more pressure that in the beta server, and will get fixed much more quicker.

Says the man who obviously isn't aware that there are bugs in the game that are still here since launch day four years ago. Having a PTU is used by a great many (most) AAA titles with an ongoing development - Even HG has one for NMS, a company 1/27th the size and a fraction of the budget available.

 

[Factabulous]

Blech, not bothered about any of the op "issues" , more annoyed that some of the bugs raised in beta are still broken. Human poi are still marked as guardian? Not gonna cause constant new threads, oh no...

 

[Muzz UK]

Or maybe a permanent public test server or something. This is kind of silly.

It seems like you use your betas exclusively for bug testing - which I get on the one hand - but it also means that you release updates with some pretty glaring usability issues, because you apparently ignore the issue when raised in beta, presumably because it's not a bug technically. For example, the "Module Cannot Be Used In This Cockpit Mode" message spam. Not a bug, but a clear usability issue that means that, instead of reducing fire-group bloat, the new Combat Mode / Analysis Mode thing actually increases it.

A longer beta period would have given you time to fix that, or a permanent public test server would have identified it ages ago.

Activating the new DSS is another example of this. Or keybinding the "fire probe" button. Or I'm sure several other things that others could name.

Please consider this.

Issue is people come on here moaning about lack of content and all the normal shizz... game goes into beta... Frontier extend beta by one week and the salt mines collapse and spray white salty crystals all over the boards. Frontier cannot win. At least we haven't gone full DayZ or paid 200 million for these bugs. Welcome to modern multiplayer gaming OP

 

[RamirezKurita]

It's not just usability, but balance is a bit of an issue for FD. They make a couple of changes to the most glaring issues, but in practice it takes much more than a couple of weeks to fine tune things and to find the abusive edge-case scenarios. Things like Smeaton, Thermal Shock brokenness or the Skimmer stacking should never have made it onto the live servers and been quashed during the beta. Not only that, they do need to continue to balance existing content, so even when there's no major release imminent they should still have a beta ongoing for balance changes to existing content rather than leaving it until the next major release.

 

[S3B4ST13N]

Says the man who obviously isn't aware that there are bugs in the game that are still here since launch day four years ago. Having a PTU is used by a great many (most) AAA titles with an ongoing development - Even HG has one for NMS, a company 1/27th the size and a fraction of the budget available.

Indeed; devs for Endless Space 2 (I think it's ES) have an experimental patch build players can install and test. When it's ready, it gets released as an update then the process begins again when a new set of updates are ready.

 

[Drelthar]

One other annoyance I was just reminded of: "Throttle down to use FSS mode". Cool. The one fun thing I could do when long-distance flying in the same system, I'm barred from doing. Neat.

Genius isn't it.

This was brought up multiple times, and just 100% ignored during the beta, not a single word from FD about it. It was a huge issue many many commanders gave feedback about. Most of which was "Why do we have to throttle down this is stupid"

 

[Stigbob]

OP There's just one problem with your analysis of the situation, you are under the impression that FDev will agree to change course on any single or multiple dev choices as suggested by the players.

Can I refer you to "Exhibit: A" - also known as the DDF - where KS backers paid no small sum to be a part of, only to have almost the ENTIRE body of suggestions and alterations to FDev's proposed dev designs IGNORED

FDev's focussed feedback is just window dressing - this is the third (fourth?) time they have asked for feedback and the third or fourth time feedback on the actual design decisions has been ignored.

Now I'll refer you to "Exhibit: B" - the generally accepted definitions of madness "doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different outcome."

The DDF was just a paid opportunity to theorycraft with the devs, and that was delivered. It never actually put the playerbase in charge.

I'm surprised people get confused by that.