op in a sense ,they found game would end too quickly and had to adjust game to make player grind more or to search more (less add-on,map ,compass,coord.
i bet either arent popular lol
but if i had to chose between a big grind of kill 1000 monster or search for something i d love to search instead
yes its a grind but a diff kind of grind that cant be botted lol(wide grin)
We go through this with every release. I am not surprised people are asking for refunds.
LOL. they totally should, this game is total crap. It's fun for about 2 days, then just annoying and repetitive. The devs give 2 sh_ts what the community wants and every time they change something they do it with a bulldozer instead of nudging inches. I tend to agree with the quote from the OP. Since aquiring STO from perpetual, this game has been half-assed nonstop. Sad. It had potential. But alot of CB testers warned of this. As usual, cryptic ignored us and rolled out Ropervision.
I never understood why some people pay lots for subsciption (lifetime and 6months) when the game has only just been released... did no one learn from Hellgate:London? Wait, wasn't that also run by someone with the initials B.R.?
Considering some people did it just for a Star Trek Online beta slot, they get what they deserve -- crackpots.
So, I was in the CO beta and opted not to get the game. It was okay, just not my style (heck, I haven't even finished MUA yet and i've had it for years but I digress....)
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Second, although unintentional in this game, typically the xp rate is set much higher in beta to get testers to all of the content. Now, considering this wasn't fully tuned in the open beta may have been misleading but, ig uess for people new to beta testing, this was a shock.
Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported. Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?". As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response. The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.
I have come to the conclusion that no matter what Cryptic does, there will be a large crowd of people ready to complain about it.
The launch day patch was possible the best balancing act that Cryptic has ever done with the game. Just today I read the first review of CO and the number one complaint about the game was that it was too easy. Every forum post I ever read about the game complained that it was too easy.
Also, I have been playing a purely support Sorcery character since Tuesday. I have soloed to level 15. I have a +damage aura, a block power, and a hold. If THAT character can solo then I don't know why others are complaining that they can't do anything at level 8.
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported. Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?". As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response. The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
The patch annoyed me to no ends since suddenly my character required more endurance in order to be effective but as frustrating as it is I dont think the patch needs a roll back or that people should be rage quitting. The game WAS too easy and there were alot of passive defensive / offensive abilities that WERE simply over powered. With a free respec coming all the rage quitters and rerollers actually look quite silly for being that well impatient / rage quit omg chicken littles but thats just my opinion on it.
In the end the patch is a good thing it makes the encounters require more thought and choosing your path in the world a bit more risky. The patch also stops people from taking god mode abilities since now many of those abilities are useless if you dont have the stats to effectively use them.
I still hate that the respec system is TOO expensive but time will tell with it.
BTW they arent' OFFERing refunds..a few people (rage quitters) are claiming to ahve gotten a refund etc. I'm kinda doubting they got anything since the forums are open to anyone regardless of subscription etc I wouldnt' doubt 75% of them are liars.
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
So Cryptic should (a) ignore player feedback, and (b) leave known imbalances in the game?
Doesn't that seem a bit wrong?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
So Cryptic should (a) ignore player feedback, and (b) leave known imbalances in the game?
Doesn't that seem a bit wrong?
Well, regardless of what cryptic SHOULD do (have a test server to test their patches on -- postponed the launch a week or two -- actually've dealt with balance during CB instead of waiting until last minute) We all know what they DID do. At least they are trying to take care of the balance... but it seems to be at the expense of additional unnecessary drama.
I played the OB and the game seemed quite polished and actually quite fun. Nerfing a game on opening day is definitley epic stupid, but I think that once they get everything balanced they will have a solid game on their hands.
Our spirit was here long before you
Long before us
And long will it be after your pride brings you to your end
Well this is one perfect example why they should let people experience the game soon after release with a trial.
Everyone that got screwed... *shrug* you're damned lucky they're even considering offering a refund for the 6-month or lifetime subscriptions. The last few I purchased on release were Hellgate: London which had a lifetime subscription that lasted about a little over one year before being shut down, and Tabula Rasa that died around the same time as well. I've been skeptical ever since then.
For those who got burned... etch this into your mind... BETA is not a representative for FINAL PRODUCT. I have beta tested many in the past, and even flamed devs for ninja nerfs and no patch notes regarding massive gameplay changes... and the response I got from the devs AND fanboi community was "We/They are not OBLIGATED to tell you everything they do." or "It's their game they do with as they see fit."
When you pay for a game that you have yet to play, by that I mean finished product, you tell the publishers and devs. that it doesn't matter what condition the game is in or turned into on release, you still want that product no matter what.
I mean, if you pre-purchased the game and have it installed, and are pissed about how things turned out and are reading this, ask yourself, "Was it worth pre-purchasing it now that they have my money and I don't like it?"
If you're in the group that's is happy about the changes, cool! Usually in my experience, like say with MxO before release, they adjusted the game xp and difficulty because while they were beta testing they wanted everyone to test as much as possible so there wasn't so much focus on grind rather than playtesting. I didn't play CO, nor do I plan to for at least another 6 months... I figure if it's still around by then bugs and balancing should be at least "worked on" by then, and if it's not around in 6 months... well it wasn't a game I needed to buy and devote my time to then... like Hellgate or Tabula Rasa. My lesson learned... welcome to RL XP.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
I was in the beta and despite the number of fanboi's trying to do damage control here it doesn't change the fact that a lot of other testers like myself tried to warn CS the client wasn't ready for launch but obviously their publisher rushed them to launch at the chance of losing their funding. Time will tell if CO sinks or swims, but I believe STO will take the spotlight for CS, and CO will keep dwindling in subscribers until CS is forced to pull the plug within a few months.
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
Okay, I can see the head start people crying (although they do get their retcons now) but why is everyone else crying then?
Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported. Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?". As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response. The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
Are you new to online gaming? "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum.
The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable. Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.
Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here. *shrug* I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance. If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things. They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part. Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
Thats really what the problem is, trying to balance after the fact because the system is inherently flawed. I'm all for classless games, but right now cryptic is trying to deal with this on a power-by-power basis when the actual problem is balancing the need for stances and specific power choices. They should have kept the weakness system and worked that out.. it would have made for a more balanced game.
Originally posted by Thrawl I played the OB and the game seemed quite polished and actually quite fun. Nerfing a game on opening day is definitley epic stupid, but I think that once they get everything balanced they will have a solid game on their hands.
If Cryptic does manage to get everything straightened out eventually it doesnt matter.
Champions Online is now officially Dead On Arrival.
Cryptic rolled out the EXP nerf and the Defense nerf untested and were not fully aware of the unexpected consequences they might cause. This has resulted in irrapable harm to Champions Online, first impressions are EVERYTHING to MMOs. Last day of Open Beta? First day of launch? Doesnt matter. The launch has been tarnished. The reputation Champions Online earned on its first day of launch will stick with it until it dies.
If you think I am being overly dramatic then ask EQ2, Vanguard and AoC about their launches.
As for the future of Champions Online, given Cryptic's penchant for overbearing wide sweeping nerfs in CoH I do not see a recovery for Champions Online.
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)
You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported. Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?". As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response. The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
Are you new to online gaming? "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum.
The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable. Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.
Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here. *shrug* I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance. If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things. They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part. Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.
Whether "Balance" was needed wasn't the topic of the quote (yours) that I was replying to.
My point was that releasing sweeping changes without playtesting on launch day, and doing so with very vague patch notes, was a terrible idea. It isn't surprising that people are upset, or that they're canceling subs this soon. Sure, it hasn't been long, but a move like that says a lot about how much trust customers can put in the developer going forward.
Whether "Balance" was needed wasn't the topic of the quote (yours) that I was replying to. My point was that releasing sweeping changes without playtesting on launch day, and doing so with very vague patch notes, was a terrible idea. It isn't surprising that people are upset, or that they're canceling subs this soon. Sure, it hasn't been long, but a move like that says a lot about how much trust customers can put in the developer going forward.
Personally I think this whole thing is tragic for Cryptic. Not out of them genuinely making real mistakes, but of how their customers have blown things out of proportion.
I mean c'mon...patch notes being vague for a single patch on release day (with the vast majority of the playerbase never having seen the game) is completely reasonable. Not something I'd do if I were in charge of the game perhaps, but not something to whine about. Certainly not worth canceling over.
Especially given that the primary target for ire (Passive Defenses) seems completely fine nowadays. Obviously things were really broken before, if the current passives are "nerfed". I'm glad they didn't wait on the change (and therefore piss off the much larger bunch of customers who would take the powers on launch day only to have them nerfed a few days later.)
Really out of all your "arguments" against Cryptic, only the weak patch notes point has any weight at all...and even that's iffy.
If you don't have fun with the game, say so and cancel. Otherwise get over yourself and enjoy the game.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You've conveniently ignored the point that the changes were massive and released on launch day without playtesting and that they affected much more than the passive defenses. They also introduced bugs (field surge, etc.) that would have been found in playtesting. They were certainly found very quickly after the patch went live. The fact that the documentation was poor and had to be figured out and detailed by players after it was released is just icing on the cake.
You asked what they could have done differently. It was pointed out that they could have extended beta (and delayed launch), since they knew huge changes were coming. Failing that, they could have put the changes on a test server. They could have introduced them incrementally.
I honestly don't see why you're bent on making any of this personal. It's a discussion about what happened and why people think it happened. If some people argue that they don't understand why others are canceling, then of course other people are going to point out why they think people feel the need to cancel. It has nothing to do with my subscription or yours, or whether either of us even has a subscription. There's nothing personal about it. It's just a discussion (that fits the forum). There's not really anything to "get over".
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)
You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)
They would really have to work a mass rebalance on the roles , or "stances" as I called them in CB. When I played all the way through OB you could sufficiently stay in balanced mode the entire time in PvE. In fact, it was better that way.. although few powers actually required the correct "role". If cryptic wanted to really balance it right using that type of system.. when you choose a powerset they should close you off to a role and only allow access to the powers that role can use. Currently the system could probably be confusing for new comers who might now know about roles, certain powers, and things of that nature, and instead just cherry pick and stay in balanced all the time.
Comments
op in a sense ,they found game would end too quickly and had to adjust game to make player grind more or to search more (less add-on,map ,compass,coord.
i bet either arent popular lol
but if i had to chose between a big grind of kill 1000 monster or search for something i d love to search instead
yes its a grind but a diff kind of grind that cant be botted lol(wide grin)
LOL. they totally should, this game is total crap. It's fun for about 2 days, then just annoying and repetitive. The devs give 2 sh_ts what the community wants and every time they change something they do it with a bulldozer instead of nudging inches. I tend to agree with the quote from the OP. Since aquiring STO from perpetual, this game has been half-assed nonstop. Sad. It had potential. But alot of CB testers warned of this. As usual, cryptic ignored us and rolled out Ropervision.
EDIT: Delete this, pointless to argue.
Considering some people did it just for a Star Trek Online beta slot, they get what they deserve -- crackpots.
So, I was in the CO beta and opted not to get the game. It was okay, just not my style (heck, I haven't even finished MUA yet and i've had it for years but I digress....)
First, can we even call a day 1 change a nerf? The changes here were the result of playtesting and feedback. Next thing you know, people will be complaining about changes made to a game between alpha and beta....
Second, although unintentional in this game, typically the xp rate is set much higher in beta to get testers to all of the content. Now, considering this wasn't fully tuned in the open beta may have been misleading but, ig uess for people new to beta testing, this was a shock.
Third, I think people are unreasonable to think that every single change can be reported. Difficulty and experience is not a straight-line algorithm where to-hit is calculated as "is 5x +2 > 10?". As was stated, there is no master spreadsheet of every conceivable combination of powers and stating the developers do not know how their game works is a bit ridiculous -- it's a juvenile response. The entire game is a complex statistical algorithm and changes made to it trickle down.
I have come to the conclusion that no matter what Cryptic does, there will be a large crowd of people ready to complain about it.
The launch day patch was possible the best balancing act that Cryptic has ever done with the game. Just today I read the first review of CO and the number one complaint about the game was that it was too easy. Every forum post I ever read about the game complained that it was too easy.
Also, I have been playing a purely support Sorcery character since Tuesday. I have soloed to level 15. I have a +damage aura, a block power, and a hold. If THAT character can solo then I don't know why others are complaining that they can't do anything at level 8.
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
I still enjoy this game thoroughly before and after the patch and I have no intentions of cancelling my lifetime sub. If anything, this patch made the game MORE fun for me. Why exactly should I be plowing through enemies left and right? Yes, I'm aware this is a SUPER HERO MMO, but it's also a VIDEO GAME. The people crying on the forums claiming they don't feel like superheroes anymore because they can't kill every non super-villain in the game at the same time without taking any damage are just being ridiculous. I literally read a post similar to "My character is made of steel, he shouldn't be killed by bullets." on the official forums. The sad thing is, there are a LOT of people saying the same thing. This community is worse than LOTRO in its constant crying.
The patch annoyed me to no ends since suddenly my character required more endurance in order to be effective but as frustrating as it is I dont think the patch needs a roll back or that people should be rage quitting. The game WAS too easy and there were alot of passive defensive / offensive abilities that WERE simply over powered. With a free respec coming all the rage quitters and rerollers actually look quite silly for being that well impatient / rage quit omg chicken littles but thats just my opinion on it.
In the end the patch is a good thing it makes the encounters require more thought and choosing your path in the world a bit more risky. The patch also stops people from taking god mode abilities since now many of those abilities are useless if you dont have the stats to effectively use them.
I still hate that the respec system is TOO expensive but time will tell with it.
BTW they arent' OFFERing refunds..a few people (rage quitters) are claiming to ahve gotten a refund etc. I'm kinda doubting they got anything since the forums are open to anyone regardless of subscription etc I wouldnt' doubt 75% of them are liars.
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
So Cryptic should (a) ignore player feedback, and (b) leave known imbalances in the game?
Doesn't that seem a bit wrong?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
So Cryptic should (a) ignore player feedback, and (b) leave known imbalances in the game?
Doesn't that seem a bit wrong?
Well, regardless of what cryptic SHOULD do (have a test server to test their patches on -- postponed the launch a week or two -- actually've dealt with balance during CB instead of waiting until last minute) We all know what they DID do. At least they are trying to take care of the balance... but it seems to be at the expense of additional unnecessary drama.
I played the OB and the game seemed quite polished and actually quite fun. Nerfing a game on opening day is definitley epic stupid, but I think that once they get everything balanced they will have a solid game on their hands.
Our spirit was here long before you
Long before us
And long will it be after your pride brings you to your end
Well this is one perfect example why they should let people experience the game soon after release with a trial.
Everyone that got screwed... *shrug* you're damned lucky they're even considering offering a refund for the 6-month or lifetime subscriptions. The last few I purchased on release were Hellgate: London which had a lifetime subscription that lasted about a little over one year before being shut down, and Tabula Rasa that died around the same time as well. I've been skeptical ever since then.
For those who got burned... etch this into your mind... BETA is not a representative for FINAL PRODUCT. I have beta tested many in the past, and even flamed devs for ninja nerfs and no patch notes regarding massive gameplay changes... and the response I got from the devs AND fanboi community was "We/They are not OBLIGATED to tell you everything they do." or "It's their game they do with as they see fit."
When you pay for a game that you have yet to play, by that I mean finished product, you tell the publishers and devs. that it doesn't matter what condition the game is in or turned into on release, you still want that product no matter what.
I mean, if you pre-purchased the game and have it installed, and are pissed about how things turned out and are reading this, ask yourself, "Was it worth pre-purchasing it now that they have my money and I don't like it?"
If you're in the group that's is happy about the changes, cool! Usually in my experience, like say with MxO before release, they adjusted the game xp and difficulty because while they were beta testing they wanted everyone to test as much as possible so there wasn't so much focus on grind rather than playtesting. I didn't play CO, nor do I plan to for at least another 6 months... I figure if it's still around by then bugs and balancing should be at least "worked on" by then, and if it's not around in 6 months... well it wasn't a game I needed to buy and devote my time to then... like Hellgate or Tabula Rasa. My lesson learned... welcome to RL XP.
"There is only one thing of which I am certain, and that's nothing is certain."
I was in the beta and despite the number of fanboi's trying to do damage control here it doesn't change the fact that a lot of other testers like myself tried to warn CS the client wasn't ready for launch but obviously their publisher rushed them to launch at the chance of losing their funding. Time will tell if CO sinks or swims, but I believe STO will take the spotlight for CS, and CO will keep dwindling in subscribers until CS is forced to pull the plug within a few months.
Because it wasn't "day 1". It was after 3 days of head start, which is the "start early" bonus given to customers who bought from certain retailers (or lifetime/6-month subs).
Instead of releasing the (sweeping) beta playtesting/feedback changes during beta and allowing them to be tested during beta, they were released 3 days after the first retail customers began playing.
Okay, I can see the head start people crying (although they do get their retcons now) but why is everyone else crying then?
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
Are you new to online gaming? "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum.
The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable. Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.
Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here. *shrug* I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance. If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things. They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part. Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
Thats really what the problem is, trying to balance after the fact because the system is inherently flawed. I'm all for classless games, but right now cryptic is trying to deal with this on a power-by-power basis when the actual problem is balancing the need for stances and specific power choices. They should have kept the weakness system and worked that out.. it would have made for a more balanced game.
Champions Online is now officially Dead On Arrival.
Cryptic rolled out the EXP nerf and the Defense nerf untested and were not fully aware of the unexpected consequences they might cause. This has resulted in irrapable harm to Champions Online, first impressions are EVERYTHING to MMOs. Last day of Open Beta? First day of launch? Doesnt matter. The launch has been tarnished. The reputation Champions Online earned on its first day of launch will stick with it until it dies.
If you think I am being overly dramatic then ask EQ2, Vanguard and AoC about their launches.
As for the future of Champions Online, given Cryptic's penchant for overbearing wide sweeping nerfs in CoH I do not see a recovery for Champions Online.
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)
You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Because that's how it came across? Because specific powers needed to be nerfed, and the changed ended up touching (and breaking some) powers across the board? Yes it's complex, but it isn't unreasonable for customers to expect developers to understand the effects of their changes and how much testing is needed to verify that the unexpected doesn't happen. If the algorithms are complex enough that the full results can only be determined by playtesting, then why were the changes released without playtesting? And worse, they were released a few days after beta testing ended instead of during beta.
Shortly after the release of the changes, players were assembling their own (detailed) patch notes to make up for the lack.
See where the loss of customer confidence comes from?
Are you new to online gaming? "Balance" is all about the swing of the pendulum.
The decision to make the changes was made because clearly they felt the status quo was not acceptable. Either most people will power through the content and then leave the game or Cryptic can maybe cause a little heartbreak in the first 2 weeks but straighten things out quickly and hope all will soon be forgiven and forgotten while prolonging subscription duration.
Frankly, I wrote that the game release should have been postponed another month, several times on their forums and even on here. *shrug* I fault Cryptic for that, but not for working on the balance. If the game were a complete mess the entire time, then I could see people losing confidence but Cryptic did have things working relatively speaking and is capable of fixing things. They've got a 30 day window to figure it out before the damage is done -- that's a sunk cost on your part. Losing confidence on day 4 of that window seems unreasonable to me but it's still your time, perhaps take a 2 week break and then check in to see if progress is there.
Whether "Balance" was needed wasn't the topic of the quote (yours) that I was replying to.
My point was that releasing sweeping changes without playtesting on launch day, and doing so with very vague patch notes, was a terrible idea. It isn't surprising that people are upset, or that they're canceling subs this soon. Sure, it hasn't been long, but a move like that says a lot about how much trust customers can put in the developer going forward.
Personally I think this whole thing is tragic for Cryptic. Not out of them genuinely making real mistakes, but of how their customers have blown things out of proportion.
I mean c'mon...patch notes being vague for a single patch on release day (with the vast majority of the playerbase never having seen the game) is completely reasonable. Not something I'd do if I were in charge of the game perhaps, but not something to whine about. Certainly not worth canceling over.
Especially given that the primary target for ire (Passive Defenses) seems completely fine nowadays. Obviously things were really broken before, if the current passives are "nerfed". I'm glad they didn't wait on the change (and therefore piss off the much larger bunch of customers who would take the powers on launch day only to have them nerfed a few days later.)
Really out of all your "arguments" against Cryptic, only the weak patch notes point has any weight at all...and even that's iffy.
If you don't have fun with the game, say so and cancel. Otherwise get over yourself and enjoy the game.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You've conveniently ignored the point that the changes were massive and released on launch day without playtesting and that they affected much more than the passive defenses. They also introduced bugs (field surge, etc.) that would have been found in playtesting. They were certainly found very quickly after the patch went live. The fact that the documentation was poor and had to be figured out and detailed by players after it was released is just icing on the cake.
You asked what they could have done differently. It was pointed out that they could have extended beta (and delayed launch), since they knew huge changes were coming. Failing that, they could have put the changes on a test server. They could have introduced them incrementally.
I honestly don't see why you're bent on making any of this personal. It's a discussion about what happened and why people think it happened. If some people argue that they don't understand why others are canceling, then of course other people are going to point out why they think people feel the need to cancel. It has nothing to do with my subscription or yours, or whether either of us even has a subscription. There's nothing personal about it. It's just a discussion (that fits the forum). There's not really anything to "get over".
People said the same thing after ED hit City of Heroes. They don't seem to grasp the point that having an "I WIN" button defeats the purpose of a game.
No its not having an "I Win" button that they are complaining about. The problem with what cyrptic has done is they made a classless system... this creates a big problem for those that want a "super hero" feel. If I have invulnerability, it should work by making me somewhat invulnerable to certain things. In most games a power like invulnerability would be reserved for tanks. In CO it isn't reserved for anyone, so in order to balance that, they have to nerf it so that it doesn't seem over powered by those who take high damage powers and high defensive powers.
The role system completely takes care of this (or it will when it gets balanced right.)
You'll still have "invulnerability" not making you completely invulnerable in Guardian (presumably intended to be the solo role,) but you'll never have the problem as you stated it: you'll never be invulnerable while dishing out the uber nukes, because either your nukes won't hit hard (without being in Avenger role) or your invulnerability won't protect you that great (without being in Protector.)
They would really have to work a mass rebalance on the roles , or "stances" as I called them in CB. When I played all the way through OB you could sufficiently stay in balanced mode the entire time in PvE. In fact, it was better that way.. although few powers actually required the correct "role". If cryptic wanted to really balance it right using that type of system.. when you choose a powerset they should close you off to a role and only allow access to the powers that role can use. Currently the system could probably be confusing for new comers who might now know about roles, certain powers, and things of that nature, and instead just cherry pick and stay in balanced all the time.