AA5 Discussion Thread (Renamed)

1141517192068

Comments

  • tortured.autortured.au Posts: 23Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    Just for the record whilst we have direct access to some of the development team, we don't really get a say in anything related to the game. We may get asked our opinions on things from time to time but generally the ARMY decides on what it wants or doesn't want. Sometimes if we are really lucky we could put in small feature requests and a dev might quickly add something if it is simple enough but it's pretty rare.

    None of us claim to be perfect at beta testing either (except levente who is just a beast ). We are just regular players too and only human, from a lot of different backgrounds. I thought when signing up for testing it would be all fun and games. Quite the opposite. It still amazes me how much time and effort goes into development, even for the smallest of things.

    I haven't met a tester yet that doesn't forward feedback given to us by the community. Usually it comes down to attitudes and respect though. With a game the size and complexity of AAPG, the fact that developers can come and go rather quickly or can be pulled onto other tasks depending on the requirements of the ARMY at the time, it's not surprising that some things remain unfinished or not fixed. This should by no means reflect badly on the dev team. You can only do what you can do with the resources allocated.

    I would also like to point out that AAPG was in open beta for a fairly long time. So who are you going to get to test the game before getting to that stage? Public players?? The quickest way to make someone never come back to a game is to give them something that is at Alpha/early beta stage and let them use it. I like the idea of the open beta but only when the game is at enough of a point to be playable and enjoyable in some form.

    Any devs want to shed some light on how long it took to go from AAPG getting approved to getting to open beta? I'm sure it wasn't measured in months.

    Don't think that we shouldn't be striving for better. I think you ask any of the people involved in the program and we all strive to make the game better. Unfortunately that has to fit within whatever guidelines the ARMY throws down whether we agree with it or not.

    Ultimately, as a player first I would like to see some of the awesome things we had in AA2 that made the game so fun and appealing brought back, with some of the good things from AA3(the few good things there were) added to the refinement that the devs have brought to AAPG.

    Who knows what the ARMY has planned, it could still end up being AA: Supply and logistics :awesome:
  • LWOF_BrOkenArrowLWOF_BrOkenArrow Posts: 326Player
    Meh, sure the army has final say of what gets added, but seeing as how they're goal is to have AA on as many "eyeballs" as possible, it'd be wise for them to listen to the players and strongly take into consideration what they'd like to see in the game.
    Teamwork is essential, it gives the enemy other people to shoot at



    P0asKE2.jpg
  • OICURMT!OICURMT! Posts: 121Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    Holy cr*p!... I've gone for four days and three pages of post have gone by!...

    Late comments, but here goes...

    1) Again, if you don't know how the client/server side works, don't comment. Don't like the fact that people think that just because they get a hit on the client side, that somehow it must be fact. That's just plain wrong.
    2) Read Tortured.au's post CAREFULLY, it's the plain truth in plain english, if you don't understand, well, then there is no hope for you.
    3) Levente is a "BEAST" ! ... :)

    OIC!
    --

    In life, there is no respawn... why should there be in a game?
  • RollingInTheHurtRollingInTheHurt Posts: 200Player
    https://steamcharts.com/app/203290#All
    Only 650 people playing America's Army in the last 24 hours for the whole wide world. Just let that sink in for a little bit. Its catastrophically bad.
    Pretty sad that people still use the circle argument and no one is taking responsibility or leadership for this mess. You might as well just shut up shop now and call it a day.
    1.jpg
  • OICURMT!OICURMT! Posts: 121Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    https://steamcharts.com/app/203290#All
    Only 650 people playing America's Army in the last 24 hours for the whole wide world. Just let that sink in for a little bit. Its catastrophically bad.
    Pretty sad that people still use the circle argument and no one is taking responsibility or leadership for this mess. You might as well just shut up shop now and call it a day.

    Look dude, we get it... not alot of people playing the game.

    We all know "we" need to do better, but seriously? Shut up shop? Sorry, but it's better to try again than to not have tried at all....

    OIC!
    --

    In life, there is no respawn... why should there be in a game?
  • tortured.autortured.au Posts: 23Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    https://steamcharts.com/app/203290#All
    Only 650 people playing America's Army in the last 24 hours for the whole wide world. Just let that sink in for a little bit. Its catastrophically bad.
    Pretty sad that people still use the circle argument and no one is taking responsibility or leadership for this mess. You might as well just shut up shop now and call it a day.

    650 regular users I should point out, on an engine that is outdated, in a game that has it's own niche market. However this isn't what the game was built for. Remember it was built as a recruitment tool. Sure, I do see your point about having a nice large community behind it but it isn't us you need to convince, it's the ARMY. I'm not sure whether a larger user base means more recruits, although I would be interested in seeing some metrics. How many PS4 players are playing in a 24hr period? Has the PS4 version contributed to an increase in recruits?

    I do agree that the ARMY (not devs) could learn a lot by listening to the long term community, especially if they want to increase the player base and increase recruitment(if the metrics prove it to be true).

    More funding and developers are required to push what you guys are asking for though. If you're an american citizen then you have people you can hound. For the rest of us we don't really get much more of a say than making a post on these forums. Someone else mentioned MARKETING, something else the ARMY needs to focus on if you want to get the game into the hands of more people.

    The devs listen more than you realize but they still have to follow orders. Could they be more active in here? Sure they could but most of us would prefer that they were locked in their little dev cubicles working on our game. Some of them are in here trying to get ideas together for what is next, to table something to put to those in charge. Then like always it turns into a dev bashing exercise or a beta bashing exercise.

    We are all trying to work towards something we want - a better game!

    Sometimes you guys come across like you have a big case of "Entitlement Syndrome". Tuck your skirt in. It's a free game. No one is twisting your arm to play it. The only people that have a right to whine about it should be the american taxpayers. For the rest of us, we are stuck to posting our ideas here for the devs to table to their superiors.
  • tortured.autortured.au Posts: 23Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    In relation to the net code and hit detection, Oic's article sums it all up perfectly. Demorecs aren't a full proof system and it wasn't a feature that was finished is my understanding (I think the guy who started the dev of that feature left).

    The one thing demorecs are good for though, is for the playing public to be able to load up and see what the server is seeing. Client side hit detection doesn't mean what the client see's is right. It is still up to the server to collect that information from the clients and make a decision based on that data. 98% of the time the information seen in the client is right and you don't notice anything unusual. The other 2% is the server making corrections once it has received the data from *all* clients.

    As a longer term player, the changes made to client side hit detection have been for the better. A few of us were staunch supporters of server side hit detection but I really do feel that the devs had made good changes to client side hit detection. Is it perfect? I haven't seen anyone say it is. Will it ever be? Given the way multiplayer games work and all the variables involved I highly doubt it.
  • {RR}Guardian-1stTec{RR}Guardian-1stTec Posts: 5Player
    edited September 2018
    To be honest you will get an account by creating an AAPG account for the forum, so no i did not made an account today just to comment on you. I was commenting on the part that Beta-testers needs to be removed, i do not agree with that. This has nothing to do with the issue there is with you and RR, because we both know what happend there. I was not even involved with that.

    As i sad earlier not every player is suited for the job as an Beta-tester or tester at all. the basics about networking and hardware and how it works is a requirement to begin with. And we both know that there are children play this game (with or without approval from there parents) which do not have these knowledge at all, would you allow these kids (or adults which do not have these knowledge) report 'bugs' which could also be an issue with there own machine?

    The communication you are talking about from the fix which was not at the end is typical IT and development. I work in the IT development as well and see this every day, this has nothing do to with the Beta-testers and not doing theire job well enough and find all of the bugs. even in Paid games there are bugs which are reported and not fixed.

    and thank you for also editing you comment, it is never my intention to hurt or assault people, we both know the Dutch kind of comment from that comment.

    Qoute
    But let's be honest with each other here, you literally made your forum profile today to take a shot at me because someone we both know that is also a Beta Tester got upset and talked about it with you guys. And I get it, my personal opinion was to remove Beta testers for AAV and have the entire community test the build before it go's live and that Beta Testers reported back that something was fixed while it wasn't and the Devs added that in the patch note. It made some people upset including the person we both know and you feel like you need to defend his honor. I salute you for that. But lets not forget that this topic is about what we want to have, what we should have and what we can do better in AAV, and that includes having a test build open to the public so that more bugs, more glitches and more issues overall can be found and fixed before it go's live.[/quote]

  • -SD-DELTON-ACI--SD-DELTON-ACI- Posts: 1,448Player
    All that being said when are we getting the next AAPG update =)
    gKQ6BB2.png
  • Dct.F|LeventeDct.F|Levente Posts: 563Beta Tester
    edited September 2018
    ...that Beta Testers reported back that something was fixed while it wasn't and the Devs added that in the patch note....

    You are making assumptions based on how you think things work. You are not right on this one. Unfortunately I can't say more because my NDA. Yes, some mistakes were made, but don't put blame on anyone based solely on assumptions. I say this not only for defending Beta Testers, but as a general principle.

    Also, please don't draw conclusions based on our lack of reaction on your claims. The problem is, that the information which we could use to back up our viewpoint is behind our NDA. So most of us follow a rather simple policy: "Keep your head down and your mouth shut", as we cannot (means: not allowed to) back up our arguments. It's impossible to really defends ourselves with the NDA in effect.



    We don't claim to be perfect. I don't think we ever did. However, I'd like to point out one huge advantage of a closed beta group in general: discipline. In the closed beta we have access to debug commands, which makes our (and Devs) life a lot easier when hunting for bugs. There are dozens - if not more - commands, which could be massively abused. But I can have full trust that if we play normally, no one will abuse them. If these commands were available for everyone, it would turn the game into a hot mess. (Edit: naturally, no one has access to these commands in the pubic version.)

    Yes, a closed group won't find all of the issues due to the limited numbers - this is also true. IMO modern games are so complex, that everyone in the community needs to report the issues they have found to have a chance for a mostly bug-free game. Just look at many AAA games with paid (!!!) internal QA Testing teams (AAPG Betas don't get a penny) - they are not able to do it either. If you are into gaming you know that a lot of full-priced AAA games release with crazy bugs. Only when the playerbase with their huge numbers starts reporting issues, can a game be made a mostly bug-free experience. The QA is there for a reason - if they were useless, studios would not pay them, as studios want profit. But a closed team is not enough, the community needs to play a role as well. So Zona, any probably many others: thank you for reporting this issues you find. Sincerely.
    Theory and reality are not that different. In theory.
  • Hey.I.Have.A.GunHey.I.Have.A.Gun Posts: 641Player
    edited September 2018
    OICURMT! wrote: »
    Holy cr*p!... I've gone for four days and three pages of post have gone by!...

    Late comments, but here goes...

    1) Again, if you don't know how the client/server side works, don't comment. Don't like the fact that people think that just because they get a hit on the client side, that somehow it must be fact. That's just plain wrong.
    2) Read Tortured.au's post CAREFULLY, it's the plain truth in plain english, if you don't understand, well, then there is no hope for you.
    3) Levente is a "BEAST" ! ... :)

    OIC!

    The explanation given has been that your client reports a hit to the server. The server decides if a hit is plausible. It "trusts" the client, to a point.

    Perhaps you can explain what the issue is in all of those videos? If the server doesn't see those as hits, how am I getting shot when I'm already behind cover on my screen?
  • aaHollywoodaaHollywood Posts: 372Developer
    https://steamcharts.com/app/203290#All
    Only 650 people playing America's Army in the last 24 hours for the whole wide world. Just let that sink in for a little bit. Its catastrophically bad.
    Pretty sad that people still use the circle argument and no one is taking responsibility or leadership for this mess. You might as well just shut up shop now and call it a day.

    And 30,000 players per day on PS4.
  • aaHollywoodaaHollywood Posts: 372Developer
    It is catastrophically bad. For PC.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,130Player
    edited September 2018
    650 regular users I should point out, on an engine that is outdated, in a game that has it's own niche market. However this isn't what the game was built for. Remember it was built as a recruitment tool. Sure, I do see your point about having a nice large community behind it but it isn't us you need to convince, it's the ARMY. I'm not sure whether a larger user base means more recruits, although I would be interested in seeing some metrics. How many PS4 players are playing in a 24hr period? Has the PS4 version contributed to an increase in recruits?

    Sometimes you guys come across like you have a big case of "Entitlement Syndrome". Tuck your skirt in. It's a free game. No one is twisting your arm to play it. The only people that have a right to whine about it should be the american taxpayers. For the rest of us, we are stuck to posting our ideas here for the devs to table to their superiors.

    Just wanted to comment on these two paragraphs.

    As a note, I think it would be a poor idea to get rid of betas and that was never my intention to state that it should ever happen. My point was always a post release comment. Once the game is in the hands of the regular players, then patches should go through the beta team, then come to the public for further testing and feedback, then make more adjustments, then repeat. People who don't want to deal with test builds can easily opt out while others get a chance to see new features, report bugs, etc. before they hit the public game. Hopefully it would lead to a better, more open, and bug free experience. The betas can squash lots of bugs, but more eyes are always better than a few.

    Anyway, I don't want to sound like a jerk, but 650 players is AWFUL. This game would be dead right now if it wasn't for PS4. Let's be honest. If the game is meant to get eyeballs on the Army then yeah, you need a large community. Not just 1000 or 2000 steady players, but tens of thousands.

    I'm an American taxpayer, most of us here are. However, I don't think my fractions of a penny spent on this game are going to break the bank. We're all here because we're fans of the series and want it to succeed. I can't stand the entitlement answers that people always throw out when others criticize the game. We're here because we want to see a successful game because we have some sort of attachment to the franchise. If the dev team told us tomorrow that America's Army games would cease production permanently, I'd be a bit saddened, but I would move on. It's a video game, it's entertainment... there are more important things in the world than games. Even still, there are millions of other things that we can do instead of sitting on these forums making suggestions for a game that won't be released for another 3ish years. Yet, here we are. This has been the most active this forum has been in probably a year and half. So let's just have fun with it instead of attacking each other.

    I agree that personal attacks on devs, betas, or anyone else are uncalled for and should be dealt with accordingly. However, reality is reality. AAPG was a failure on PC. No one wants to see the same thing happen with AAV.
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • [!ReDRuM!]Damian[!ReDRuM!]Damian Posts: 735Player
    edited September 2018
    It is catastrophically bad. For PC.

    Agreed, that's why things need to happen big for AAV.
    • More promotional events, sponsoring big youtubers/streamers for the game, E3/Gamescom?.
    • More communication between Devs and the community.
    • A public test build to have more people squash bugs/glitches (yes betas testers can stay).
    • XP Events, Special rewards events in the form of weapon skins, soldier uniform skins, event winners icon in front their names. Anything to make them compete for that little extra "look at me" feeling.

    There probably a ton of more ideas the community can ad to it, but AAV should have something new to it that the series never have seen before. Don't go futuristic, just stay modern. The amount of times people requested the silencers back, bipods back, etc.. should already indicate what they wanted from AAPG and never received..
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 630Player
    edited September 2018
    It is catastrophically bad. For PC.

    We the pc people suffered because we got nothing while you developed the ps4 version.
    A big reason why pc failed...

    Would like to know when you started with it. My guess is around official release of the pc version. Just because we got more or less nothing since then. At least nothing that would help the game.

    Nice that it is that popular on ps4, maybe it helps pc, too. But it looks like we were used as test dummys. :)
    AAPG is good!
  • aaHollywoodaaHollywood Posts: 372Developer
    It is catastrophically bad. For PC.

    Agreed, that's why things need to happen big for AAV.
    • More promotional events, sponsoring big youtubers/streamers for the game, E3/Gamescom?.
    • More communication between Devs and the community.
    • A public test build to have more people squash bugs/glitches (yes betas testers can stay).
    • XP Events, Special rewards events in the form of weapon skins, soldier uniform skins, event winners icon in front their names. Anything to make them compete for that little extra "look at me" feeling.

    There probably a ton of more ideas the community can ad to it, but AAV should have something new to it that the series never have seen before. Don't go futuristic, just stay modern. The amount of times people requested the silencers back, bipods back, etc.. should already indicate what they wanted from AAPG and never received..

    All great ideas we plan to do.

    And I'm 94% sure those attachments will return in AAV based on initial discussions.
  • 4DChessGenius4DChessGenius Posts: 2,130Player
    edited September 2018
    Hmm, what's the 6%? :lol:
    You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
  • -R@MPAGE--R@MPAGE- Posts: 151Player
    Any update on what stages AAV might be in? Like has a game been someone built or you all still just chatting around a round table about it?
    image
  • -vR|Drop-vR|Drop Posts: 32Beta Tester
    -R@MPAGE- wrote: »
    Any update on what stages AAV might be in? Like has a game been someone built or you all still just chatting around a round table about it?

    Coding hasn't been worked on yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.