Instead of doing QA internally tests ( and hiring professional testers like all decent companies do ) you guys keep shooting your own feet using normal players as your testing material.
Thats one of the main reasons game is going down the pipe as it is.
Thats one of the reasons info leaks too early and you watch auction prices going bananas.
And finally.. thats the main reason you get bugs over bugs and bad decisions when you launch a patch.
Get some professional game testers and stop using your players as testers. Players views and opinions are biased torwards their own agendas and you will never get propper neutral feedback. Ever.
Agree with the above statement 100%. I might add....in regards to possible new crafting recipes....
Can these 'early access' testers be given incomplete crafting info/recipes if possible? Signing an NDA or not, I trust NONE of them not to pass the information on to their crafting friends giving them an unfair advantage over the rest of the player base. It would be naive to think this has not occured in past mods and would not happen again.
3
demonmongerMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,350Arc User
Testing is always fun
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I hate paying taxes! Why must I pay thousands of dollars in taxes when everything I buy is taxed anyways!
How about someone who is well geared but not elite, and has provided multiple feedback without being a troll. Someone who is dedicated to PvE instead of PvP, yes I know your revenue is there but a more positive experience in the PvE world would do wonders.
Varric the Cursed Dwarven cursed to be Tiefling CW Original Serenity Mostly Retired DC Tokarek Bearded Dwarven OP Tankadin JuiceHead Goofy Human GWF Member of H3llzWarriors and Limitless.
We have recently begun gathering a focus group to provide early feedback on upcoming content and we understand there are questions from the community in regards to eligibility. While there are some general qualities we look for, the criteria is subject to change based on the content focus and the feedback type being sought. If the content is heavily reliant on theorycrafting, we will turn to some community members who have shown a history of quality feedback in that area; If the content is based on X focus of the game, we would look for players who have shown dedication and interest in X area.
What are the general eligibility criteria?
History of high quality feedback (well expressed, constructive, relevant)
No history of abusive behavior or toxicity
Access to a PC (all early access is done on Owlbear)
Ability to communicate in English (English does not need to be the primary language of the player but there has to be enough level of fluency to play the game and provide feedback in English)
Being critical of the game (as long as it remains non-abusive) is not a disqualifying criteria
These groups are typically small (10-20 players) in order for us to better manage the feedback. The final list of players invited is based on recommendations from the feature or project leads (designers, producers, etc.). Being invited to one focus group does not guarantee or disqualify a spot in a future one.
We appreciate the community excitement around these initiatives and we hope they remain a positive experience to ensure future early access projects!
EDIT: Early Access groups are by invitation only, not application. Players are welcomed to let us know they are interested in participating in future initiatives!
whats the use of a testing group if you will ignore the Feedback anyways, like u guys did with the mod 16 alpha testing team?
10
lazaroth666Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,332Arc User
In the most recent AMA, I asked regarding the feats that improve specific powers vs. providing general generic bonuses, that for some classes is something that completely changed the game (for the worse) especially if compared to other classes. I received the following answer from Asterdahl:
I've addressed this a bit in the past, but it was a goal with the changes to feats that there are less feats that are passively occurring on activation of all powers. This is both to improve server performance and increase readability in combat, by not having a myriad of effects occurring passively. We also wanted the feats to more strongly change the playstyle of each class, so that players who chose one feat over another might consider using a different loadout of powers. We understand that there are some feats that players may feel are not as strong as the alternate choice; however, and that is something we are gathering data on. We will continue to make changes to classes in the future. We'd like to let the dust settle first, but then, if there are feats that aren't strong enough, or aren't being used, we may enhance or completely overhaul those feats.
1- It is better to have some active effect than to have a feat dedicated to a power that is never used or rarely used.
2- There are no playstyles in Neverwinter, you simply use what is most efficient within the limited amount of options that exist now. You try to fulfill your role in the game the best you can with the few options you have and that's your build. For playstyles, that can be seen in games like Path of Exile where you can reach endgame practically with any kind of build and you'll never feel inferior to another player because each one has its advantages and limitations. This is impossible to see here.
3- We are in the present, saying that we don't like these changes and we have to wait months for you to finish collecting data that will show you what we have been telling you for months already?
Although my message may seem like an answer to what Asterdahl replied to me, in fact, it's not. I'm not trying to point out that he's guilty of anything because maybe the developers are just as passionate about the game as most of us are. What I want to show is that there is a huge barrier between developers and players. Feedback is always ignored to the extent that the general feeling about it is that it is a waste of time to provide it, a terrible thing in any game. I get the impression that for you we are annoying "customers" who are just complaining all the time when the truth is that we want the best for a game we love infinitely.
I propose that together as a community we make a list of the most serious problems that affect our gameplay, fun and any other necessary points. With the developers working on that list as closely as possible until we reach a point where both sides are satisfied with the solution. (Provided that this has the initial consent of the developers.)
Let's be honest, the game is not at its best. What keeps most here is the love for D&D, the relationships created after so much time together, the time invested in character development, guilds, etc. This is something that you will not see in your data, it is something that only we who spend hours communicating with others within the game can see.
So a comment like " You killed the game" would disqualify someone whereas a comment like "If you keep ignoring the testers you are likely to become a negative revenue stream" is fine? Just checking.
Since i most likely won't be considered i would like to see @vorphied and @quickfoot#7851 added to the team. Both provide concise feedback on top NW issues on a consistant basis
Thanks, but I'm not that smart, and have been moderated for "trolling", even though I think it was just the cold hard truth with a twist of humor, but whatever.
Anyways, personally I would prefer they higher professionals game designers instead of using unpaid possibly biased players. If I was in charge I would do something like this.
1) Have the designers communicate transparently with the whole community what their ideas are in a forum thread and then consider feedback from the players. 2) Rehash the ideas with the community's feedback and redo step 1 until most people are satisfied with the concepts. 3) Roll out an implementation and test it internally until it's ready for public preview 4) Release preview build, and continue with the normal cycle but actually listen to players about bugs and get them fixed before releasing to live.
Ideally they would have some form of unit testing to weed out bugs before releasing to preview. A lot of bugs I have seen on live, never should have even made it to preview if they had been properly unit tested, stuff like maths not working right or buffs not working, that stuff should be able to be detected in automated unit tests way way before they players have a chance to hunt bugs themselves.
A bug hunter program might be cool too, with in-game rewards based on the impact of the bug and the quality of the bug report.
I'd like to partecipate in m18 early access too; EU player here
404 Italians Not Found Guild Leader
Matt Shieldheart 3.5k GF Conq PVE _ Matt Shieldheart 0 3.5k GF Tactician PVE _ Matt Shieldheart II 4.1k Buffer DC _ Matt Shieldheart III 4.3k Thauma CW _ Matt Shieldheart IV 3.5k Exe TR _ Matt Shieldheart V 3.9k Destroyer GWF _ Matt Shieldheart VI 3.1k Trapper HR _ Matt Shieldheart VII 3.1k Fury SW _ Matt ShieldheartVIII 3.6k OP Justice _ Matt Shieldheart -8 3.1k Healadin _ Matt Shieldheart -9 3.1k Mof Rene CW
Comments
Can these 'early access' testers be given incomplete crafting info/recipes if possible? Signing an NDA or not, I trust NONE of them not to pass the information on to their crafting friends giving them an unfair advantage over the rest of the player base. It would be naive to think this has not occured in past mods and would not happen again.
Original Serenity Mostly Retired DC
Tokarek Bearded Dwarven OP Tankadin
JuiceHead Goofy Human GWF
Member of H3llzWarriors and Limitless.
I've addressed this a bit in the past, but it was a goal with the changes to feats that there are less feats that are passively occurring on activation of all powers. This is both to improve server performance and increase readability in combat, by not having a myriad of effects occurring passively. We also wanted the feats to more strongly change the playstyle of each class, so that players who chose one feat over another might consider using a different loadout of powers. We understand that there are some feats that players may feel are not as strong as the alternate choice; however, and that is something we are gathering data on. We will continue to make changes to classes in the future. We'd like to let the dust settle first, but then, if there are feats that aren't strong enough, or aren't being used, we may enhance or completely overhaul those feats.
1- It is better to have some active effect than to have a feat dedicated to a power that is never used or rarely used.
2- There are no playstyles in Neverwinter, you simply use what is most efficient within the limited amount of options that exist now. You try to fulfill your role in the game the best you can with the few options you have and that's your build. For playstyles, that can be seen in games like Path of Exile where you can reach endgame practically with any kind of build and you'll never feel inferior to another player because each one has its advantages and limitations. This is impossible to see here.
3- We are in the present, saying that we don't like these changes and we have to wait months for you to finish collecting data that will show you what we have been telling you for months already?
Although my message may seem like an answer to what Asterdahl replied to me, in fact, it's not. I'm not trying to point out that he's guilty of anything because maybe the developers are just as passionate about the game as most of us are. What I want to show is that there is a huge barrier between developers and players. Feedback is always ignored to the extent that the general feeling about it is that it is a waste of time to provide it, a terrible thing in any game. I get the impression that for you we are annoying "customers" who are just complaining all the time when the truth is that we want the best for a game we love infinitely.
I propose that together as a community we make a list of the most serious problems that affect our gameplay, fun and any other necessary points. With the developers working on that list as closely as possible until we reach a point where both sides are satisfied with the solution. (Provided that this has the initial consent of the developers.)
Let's be honest, the game is not at its best. What keeps most here is the love for D&D, the relationships created after so much time together, the time invested in character development, guilds, etc. This is something that you will not see in your data, it is something that only we who spend hours communicating with others within the game can see.
@mimicking#6533
Anyways, personally I would prefer they higher professionals game designers instead of using unpaid possibly biased players. If I was in charge I would do something like this.
1) Have the designers communicate transparently with the whole community what their ideas are in a forum thread and then consider feedback from the players.
2) Rehash the ideas with the community's feedback and redo step 1 until most people are satisfied with the concepts.
3) Roll out an implementation and test it internally until it's ready for public preview
4) Release preview build, and continue with the normal cycle but actually listen to players about bugs and get them fixed before releasing to live.
Ideally they would have some form of unit testing to weed out bugs before releasing to preview. A lot of bugs I have seen on live, never should have even made it to preview if they had been properly unit tested, stuff like maths not working right or buffs not working, that stuff should be able to be detected in automated unit tests way way before they players have a chance to hunt bugs themselves.
A bug hunter program might be cool too, with in-game rewards based on the impact of the bug and the quality of the bug report.
Founder of Avengers Midwest
Matt Shieldheart 3.5k GF Conq PVE _ Matt Shieldheart 0 3.5k GF Tactician PVE _ Matt Shieldheart II 4.1k Buffer DC _ Matt Shieldheart III 4.3k Thauma CW _ Matt Shieldheart IV 3.5k Exe TR _ Matt Shieldheart V 3.9k Destroyer GWF _ Matt Shieldheart VI 3.1k Trapper HR _ Matt Shieldheart VII 3.1k Fury SW _ Matt ShieldheartVIII 3.6k OP Justice _ Matt Shieldheart -8 3.1k Healadin _ Matt Shieldheart -9 3.1k Mof Rene CW