Compared to their patching for their older games. Nowadays they rarely make a tweak, see how it goes, then tweak it again in a relatively short turnaround.
Balancing changes has been generally relegated to the major patches and hotfixes rarely change anything mechanically unless it was actually broken.
Combine the number of changes, the questionable design choices in the supporting systems and with the poor overall QA process, that’s why why there’s generally a noticeable lack of excitement for upcoming patches and why interest falls off so quickly after.
I edited previous post to answer this question. Going forward, should I keep a record of who does? My point was, that if one is going to get upset at another for using platitudes, it seems that the nature of said platitude is the problem, not the use of platitudes itself.
Go look at steam reviews and other social media platforms then. Go put in some leg work to get your own data to see who likes the crafting system. Not just tolerates it.
You said someone accused you of speaking in platitudes. You said it wasn’t me, and I am the only one who used that word in a long while here so you said I didn’t so who? You can search this stuff.
Gradual as in small or single changes of a thing, observe the effects, intended and otherwise, then tweak the change and so on.
What Fatshark has been doing is dropping large amounts balancing, mechanical, performative and other changes at once, and then finding out after the fact that change 4 interacts with change 54 in a bad way, changes 63-67 to curb behaviour A breaks certain things with an archetype because of change 93, things like that. They drop the sledgehammer on things and rarely dial it back.
It’s like a person installing 50 mods at once and the game doesn’t run any more, rather than installing each mod one by one and making sure the game runs so they at least know what mod was causing the issue. Except with the modding example it only affects that person, with major patch releases it affects all the players.
I was wondering that. I played a game on PS3 called DUST 514, and that game had a lot of issues too and didn’t really shine until the end of PS3. The problem with patching it was that it was throttled by Sony certification process. They could only roll out so many patches. CCP, the creator of the game now has a new FPS project called VANGUARD that they’re doing only for PC. The benefit to this is that they can implement as many changes as they like as often as they like. Daily if they want to…
I wonder if FS has an NDA on them from XBOX that prohibits them from saying “It’s XBOX’s fault we can’t roll out regular patches.” And if you want to keep cross-play open, you have to keep versions in lock step. This is the one time I think drawing on a warframe example would be good. Specifically, having the cross-platform servers, and then the PC servers and the XBOX servers. Sounds complicated.
DUST 514
Yeah, Warframe went through A LOT to get through to the other platforms, from one-time save transfers, manual cross-save, auto cross-save and eventually cross-play. Multiplatforming is hard, even if you have your own account system layer. (cough hitmancough)
Depends on the game. Warframe’s spaghetti code really makes doing anything difficult and they hemmed and hawed for years about cross-saves, let alone crossplay… also doesn’t have to be hard. Like, at all. Remember Rocket League? Devs just had the options sitting there in the back-end ready to go when they announced crossplay. All they had to do was enable it… But Sony was the one playing hardball at the time (EH, familiar?) making everyone trip over their dong because they basically own the “hardcore” console market… Not a problem NOW, but they moaned about it for ages.
Sure you can claim the evidence can change over time and people change their opinions.
You can bawk at the sample size.
You can argue that the data gathering method is not totally conclusive or comprehensive.
At the day it’s evidence vs no evidence.
That’s the whole point. Out of all the posts I looked at I found one that called the crafting complaints overblown.
That’s what we are asking, go look, go survey people, make a thread, get your own data. That is what people are asking for instead of using Silent Majority is a weak defence for crafting.
If the crafting update isn’t what they have planned to release for the skulls event, I’m gonna shove this game back into my dusty mind closet. Probably should’ve continued doing that until they actually said what the crafting changes would be, but you know, small amount of hope it would’ve been out soon and all that.
Could this not also be applied to any review? be it negative or positive, as long as the aforementioned time has passed and they have had a chance to change their mind about any perticular stance about the game? Should I just not trust any concern or praise other people have about the game?
and here 
