First opt-in test starts 23 April 2015

1235

Comments

  • -=1S1K=-MK-1982-=1S1K=-MK-1982 Posts: 16Player
    I agree with fd.mulgarus- .... this version let you think.... OH MY GOD they are going to do another AA3like version...

    I interrupted to play americas army for that version of this game... Think about this.
  • [CZBGR]Lytton[CZBGR]Lytton Posts: 9Player
    You guys are building this game from the ideas from only ONE community, with throwing out the ideas, and thoughts of the other community.

    well, I thought the AA community was ONE community....

  • Mulgarus.Carbon8Mulgarus.Carbon8 Posts: 65Player
    well, I thought the AA community was ONE community....

    Yes it is ONE community, but there are TWO different communities(groups) within that ONE community.
    There is public player group, and there is comp player group. They DO belong in the AA community, but they play totally different, and look at the game itself differently.



    And -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I, I'm not going to get into all the different things that I think need to change here because there are alright multiple threads with those problems. I understand that Euro's play different than NA players, not saying anyone's style is wrong, but comp players look at the game, and its gameplay different then public players.
    I agree with fd.mulgarus- .... this version let you think.... OH MY GOD they are going to do another AA3like version...

    I interrupted to play americas army for that version of this game... Think about this.
    I did too.. They didn't listen to anyone in the comp community then either..

    Add ME to Steam.
  • -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I-=NoBS=-Reyfox_I Posts: 62Beta Tester
    The game is still in beta. The ones that are actually paying to have the game developed have the final "say so". Not you, nor I, nor any "group". Can it be made better? Yeah, I guess it can. But it has to be within the design set forth by those that oversee the developers. Also, there is the budget constraints. Just a little info for everyone. A BF version will spend $100mill in development. Over the entire lifespan of AA, $32mill spent.
    Things requested from comp players (and there are some in beta) have to also appeal to the non comp group. It's one game.
    IF it's maps, then are the comp players creating them to actually show what it is they are talking about?
    IF it's game mechanics, I am curious to what specific things are of interest.
    As for being AA3 like, what does that mean?
    Mr. aweSOMEness®™
  • -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I-=NoBS=-Reyfox_I Posts: 62Beta Tester
    Hi... my points about the sound:
    • I have logitec G430 Headset 7.1 surround emulated
    • In the previous version of AAPG I can localize the sound and the distance where it came from
    • In this version the distance were the sound came from is not very precise, sometimes someone is out of a building and you think he is very very close even if he is not
    • I cannot localise precisely where is the direction of the sound (I hope is because in not yet optimized for 7.1 surround).
    My point about the new map: TOO BIG... the size s inhappropriate for this game in my opinion.

    Good point: the graphic seems to be lighter but the color are not realistic as in the actual version.

    I too have a logitech G35 headset. While it's pretty good, the in game sound, it has been posted it's a work in progress. These specific issues are being addressed.
    As for map size, that's subjective. I think some are too small and others are just right. None are too big, at least to me.

    Mr. aweSOMEness®™
  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    The game is still in beta. The ones that are actually paying to have the game developed have the final "say so". Not you, nor I, nor any "group".
    You're putting a lot of words in people's mouths here.
    Can it be made better? Yeah, I guess it can. But it has to be within the design set forth by those that oversee the developers. Also, there is the budget constraints. Just a little info for everyone. A BF version will spend $100mill in development. Over the entire lifespan of AA, $32mill spent.
    All the more reason to get input from a larger swath of players early on -- reduce the amount of develop, release to closed, get feedback, iterate, release to open, get feedback, iterate. Every one of those cycles represents additional effort. The sooner the Devs get the best possible feedback, the better.
    Things requested from comp players (and there are some in beta) have to also appeal to the non comp group. It's one game.
    In what way does this conflict with Mulgarus's suggestion that competition players have a say earlier in the process? What are you arguing against here?
    IF it's maps, then are the comp players creating them to actually show what it is they are talking about?
    Why does a player need to create a map to have a say in what leads to good map design? Pro players in other games are involved in the design process because they put a lot of time into their games of choice and understand the game at a very deep level. They don't build the maps themselves; instead, their opinions are sought by the people seeking to create good maps. The competition community in the AA series has a huge amount of experience. You're creating a false dichotomy here by suggesting that players need to make maps to have feedback.
    IF it's game mechanics, I am curious to what specific things are of interest.
    Read any of the huge number of feedback threads posted in the last few days.
  • -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I-=NoBS=-Reyfox_I Posts: 62Beta Tester
    BCPull wrote: »
    The game is still in beta. The ones that are actually paying to have the game developed have the final "say so". Not you, nor I, nor any "group".
    You're putting a lot of words in people's mouths here.
    No I am not. I am stating a fact.
    Can it be made better? Yeah, I guess it can. But it has to be within the design set forth by those that oversee the developers. Also, there is the budget constraints. Just a little info for everyone. A BF version will spend $100mill in development. Over the entire lifespan of AA, $32mill spent.
    All the more reason to get input from a larger swath of players early on -- reduce the amount of develop, release to closed, get feedback, iterate, release to open, get feedback, iterate. Every one of those cycles represents additional effort. The sooner the Devs get the best possible feedback, the better.
    And you know for a fact they haven't done this. How long has the game been in beta? How long have posts been made in the forums? Plenty of input. They decide what they need and want. Not you or I.
    Things requested from comp players (and there are some in beta) have to also appeal to the non comp group. It's one game.
    In what way does this conflict with Mulgarus's suggestion that competition players have a say earlier in the process? What are you arguing against here?
    Maybe I misunderstood what was written...
    Hire a Competitive Beta group of players, because you already have a public beta group of players. with leader structure on both sides.
    IF it's maps, then are the comp players creating them to actually show what it is they are talking about?
    Why does a player need to create a map to have a say in what leads to good map design? Pro players in other games are involved in the design process because they put a lot of time into their games of choice and understand the game at a very deep level. They don't build the maps themselves; instead, their opinions are sought by the people seeking to create good maps. The competition community in the AA series has a huge amount of experience. You're creating a false dichotomy here by suggesting that players need to make maps to have feedback.
    A player does not have to. But if this is really important, and would be a good thing for the game, do it. Put it out there for the public to see and to play. If it takes off, you have the evidence.
    IF it's game mechanics, I am curious to what specific things are of interest.
    Read any of the huge number of feedback threads posted in the last few days.
    .

    The question was directed for your input. I've read them. There will always be feedback, no matter how "perfect" a game is. Always.
    Mr. aweSOMEness®™
  • Mulgarus.Carbon8Mulgarus.Carbon8 Posts: 65Player
    lol, I'm done with this guy, he's right we are wrong..
    Add ME to Steam.
  • [ENG]Uni-Sol[ENG]Uni-Sol Posts: 3,183Player
    Can't we all just get along? lets have a group AAPG hug.
    If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.






  • SacchoSaccho Posts: 1,577Player
    The game is still in beta. The ones that are actually paying to have the game developed have the final "say so". Not you, nor I, nor any "group".
    BCPull wrote:
    You're putting a lot of words in people's mouths here.
    No I am not. I am stating a fact.
    Your statement suggests that Mulgarus is being somehow presumptuous by explicitly stating he doesn't have "final say so". In the context of you publicly calling him out, the intent of the statement was clear.
    And you know for a fact they haven't done this. How long has the game been in beta? How long have posts been made in the forums? Plenty of input. They decide what they need and want. Not you or I.
    They don't iterate based on feedback? Everything said in the closed beta forums is totally ignored? I don't believe that for a second. Read what you're responding to again. If they aren't iterating on feedback, what's the explanation for the Devs responding to the requests in these forums? I've seen the process. I know it happens.
    A player does not have to. But if this is really important, and would be a good thing for the game, do it. Put it out there for the public to see and to play. If it takes off, you have the evidence.
    Again: there isn't some sort of mapper entry requirement for offering feedback. There's no reason to conflate creating maps with offering feedback on maps like you did in your earlier post.
  • hazealusRAWRhazealusRAWR Posts: 97Player
    lol, I'm done with this guy, he's right we are wrong..

  • [ENG]Uni-Sol[ENG]Uni-Sol Posts: 3,183Player
    Anyone else find it refreshing to see the serverlist no longer 90% populated by Inner Hospital servers? :)
    If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.






  • -=}WoLvErInE{=--=}WoLvErInE{=- Posts: 1,117Beta Tester
    New forums new attitudes please. Plenty of room for all of us to try and get along.

    “A house divided against itself cannot stand."
  • [CZBGR]Lytton[CZBGR]Lytton Posts: 9Player
    edited April 2015
    Yes it is ONE community, but there are TWO different communities(groups) within that ONE community.
    There is public player group, and there is comp player group. They DO belong in the AA community, but they play totally different, and look at the game itself differently.

    we are playing the same game, right? I don't see "AA: Competition Edition" anywhere, unless I've missed it..... :/

    (whoa broken quote system!)
  • =IK=Doba==IK=Doba= Posts: 2,789Player
    That's also why you don't see a popular game
    _____________________________
    #Support Comp Mode

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN4YhM6jUB2MxVj8i3b9rhw
  • Mulgarus.Carbon8Mulgarus.Carbon8 Posts: 65Player

    we are playing the same game, right? I don't see "AA: Competition Edition" anywhere, unless I've missed it..... :/

    (whoa broken quote system!)
    Yes I see it everyday, you can find part of it HERE.

    Add ME to Steam.
  • Mulgarus.Carbon8Mulgarus.Carbon8 Posts: 65Player
    edited April 2015
    I guess I have a question for the "Admins" and "DEVs".. What is the point of making a NEW game (aka Final Release) instead of focusing on the current version and finishing that before making a brand new game that is going to be Full of bugs and problems more than we have in AA:PG?
    Since there isn't any update for this new game this weekend, I'm going back to AA:PG.. glhf
    Add ME to Steam.
  • -=1S1K=-MK-1982-=1S1K=-MK-1982 Posts: 16Player
    HI my intension wasn't against the AAPG programmers.... I want the game is the best way with what ever is your budget.

    I think is a great game now even with some bug... I think I can speack for my clan:

    We played AA 2.8 a lot and we felt the same sensation with the current version. Is fast, small maps... I just liked it.
    With this weekend vesion...I know is a beta... is almost like a new game .... the graphic environment is changed... It's nice but.... I feel is kind of slower game.....

    ...I comunicate my sound problems just to push the developpers too mprove that aspect not to be polemic

    Guys I love Amercas Army and I speack only because NOW I Prefer this game to ALL THE OTHER EXPENSIVE GAME I purchased BF3 and BF4 but I just played them because my clan did not like AA3....

    NOW WE PREFER AAPG compared to whatever is on the market.
  • -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I-=NoBS=-Reyfox_I Posts: 62Beta Tester
    BCPull wrote: »
    The game is still in beta. The ones that are actually paying to have the game developed have the final "say so". Not you, nor I, nor any "group".
    BCPull wrote:
    You're putting a lot of words in people's mouths here.
    No I am not. I am stating a fact.
    Your statement suggests that Mulgarus is being somehow presumptuous by explicitly stating he doesn't have "final say so". In the context of you publicly calling him out, the intent of the statement was clear.
    That is how you interpret it. That is not what I wrote nor my intent. If that were the case, I am also calling myself "out". And yes, the ones that are paying for the game do have the "final say so". You know that too.
    And you know for a fact they haven't done this. How long has the game been in beta? How long have posts been made in the forums? Plenty of input. They decide what they need and want. Not you or I.
    They don't iterate based on feedback? Everything said in the closed beta forums is totally ignored? I don't believe that for a second. Read what you're responding to again. If they aren't iterating on feedback, what's the explanation for the Devs responding to the requests in these forums? I've seen the process. I know it happens.
    Do they? Where have I wrote that everything was totally ignored? Again, I was plain in my explanation. "They decide what they need and want". That is not a difficult line to grasp. The Devs are active in the forums, and that's a good thing. But if they don't take "my" suggestions (which I think are totally right all the time and they should... heck even pay me for them), that's the way it is. They have their reasons. Anyone can speculate as to what they are, but only they can answer to the specifics. In my above sentence which you quoted makes the assertion at the very beginning asks for evidence they don't listen, but goes on to say that they make the choices on what is implemented.
    A player does not have to. But if this is really important, and would be a good thing for the game, do it. Put it out there for the public to see and to play. If it takes off, you have the evidence.
    Again: there isn't some sort of mapper entry requirement for offering feedback. There's no reason to conflate creating maps with offering feedback on maps like you did in your earlier post.
    A picture is worth a thousand words. If what is being suggested is not being implemented (and reading the posts, it hasn't), then why not take the time to SHOW everyone what you are talking about? How it will improve the game play? The tools are there. Why not use them. There was a contest for UMM (User Made Maps). Drecks won the competition. I don't know how it was judged or what the criteria was, but were there ones submitted by comp groups? If so, I would think that would mean they can be made public. Is it not worth the effort to do this if it is this important in improving the game?
    Mr. aweSOMEness®™
  • -=NoBS=-Reyfox_I-=NoBS=-Reyfox_I Posts: 62Beta Tester
    lol, I'm done with this guy, he's right we are wrong..

    I have not said that at all. Because I disagree with you does not make me right or wrong. It means I disagree with you.
    Sorry if I offended you. That was not my intent.
    Mr. aweSOMEness®™
This discussion has been closed.