I didn’t want to play v1 because it was slow paced and rng was bs, most of was based if you had specific traits on weapon or not
Maybe ask a direct question in the Q&A about what you want to know? They’ve been pretty direct with their answers. I asked when we’re getting new characters. They replied, we’re not. But we will get new careers. Some of these questions are pretty vague and misleading. Which is why you end up with vague answers. Give a direct question exactly about what you want to know.
For example, when can we expect new maps? Is every class getting a new career? Etc.
1 Like
There were a few topics during the beta when there was fruitful discussion with the devs regarding dodge and stagger. At that time they weren’t restricted by company policy regarding communication and we even got actual technical details to get more insight of what’s happening and why. They didn’t have to be cautious about what they said as they wanted the best feedback we could give.
Now I see nothing like that and this is what’s missing again from FS’s communication. We’re back to the “we are looking into it, we have plans, we’re monitoring it, etc”.
There is the question of the deed rework. Hedge already said that they will make something awesome, but we haven’t seen anything regarding it. We get it once it’s done and that will be it. Why not share the plans and we might comment on what we like and dislike in it, before - and I think it’s already is -, it’s done and cannot be altered?
2 Likes
Strange especially when they say something community instantly change it into something negative and spew bs hmm
1 Like
I really enjoyed the arrival of the Beastmen and I´m happy with the return of Drachenfels, but I will be clear:
I don’t want new careers, I want new heroes. I don’t want to change books and map objects, I want new maps. I want to open my mountain of chests in something useful. I want new types of enemies. I want new weapons.
This is a summary of what V2 needs.
1 Like
No its summary what you want, for example i despise idea of new heroes, new careers would be nice, book location ehh dunno, new objective completly yes.
hoarding chests is useless few times FS already said if there will be change old chests wont give advantage on it
3 Likes
This is so boring guys. Your aswers are always “yes”, “yes we are aware”, “yes, we are working on it”.
What about an instant spawned mauler behind a player with an already charged up overhead? I saw this and similar many, many times.
You cannot even fix that heroes dialogues have priority over warning others of assassins, leeches. After it pounces, heroes mention that “gutter runners!”
With this soooo positive q&a you are become childish.
And one more thing. As I saw, someone mentioned that lots of players didn’t buy WoM, and wont buy them. Your answer was if they wont buy dlc, they will cosmetics because you need the money. It’s okay, you have to pay your empoyees, but how could you wrote it down?! This tells me you are more of a money making company instead of game developers. You sell buggy content and you dare to say that if players wont buy a pack of bug, they will buy cosmetics? Buggy, but shiney, this is the future of Vermintide if I understand correctly?
If you fix the issues and bugs what we are suffering from (instant spawns behind, beastmen climbing animation like 0, then instant attack, heart attacks for heroes and die, specials problems, etc), we will gladly support you in many ways to keep up your good work. But sadly now this is not happening, buggy contents, already fixed issues come in again, and so on. Let’s be honest, nowadays your developers are not doing good at Fatshark, as we can see through the issues the game has. Not to mention I didn’t get an answer for my problem, just the “check the sound setup in windows” checked, replied that issue still exists, got literally no attention. No1 customer support.
I beg you, dont add a single thing to the game. At least till you fix the majority of the issues. If the bugreport wont be filled with topics, only then add content. We are still here, your “hardcore” base, we want to help but sometimes noone listens. You can imagine how dedicated I am with 2032 hours and still waiting for fixes.
4 Likes
-
Current tHP is a very good balance between attrition and a more dynamic and “open” fighting style. Just tHP on cleave and on crit/hs must be buffed a little bit… and mostly we should better distribute these talents between careers (some of them have inappropriate tHp talents for their style).
Some players have good memories about V1… but V2 works in another way, it needs tHP. For sure we must not see another nerf. -
About final events, as difficulty, they are almost all balanced. We just must tuned down Fort and Convocation (as Fatshark said)… so we must not increase the difficulty, but the “fun”. Some final events are a little bit slow. A simply example: Blithtreaper. Let us active the buttons without “a delay”.
-
I’m sorry to say that, but Bogenhafen is really poor. You should improve it.
4 Likes
Yes, blightreaper’s end is like travelling on a train for hours. Boring. And long also. If we see the blightreaper loading screen, always skip that map.
With the activate on will I have problems. For example on Gardens if Morr, almost all players cut the chains like in an instant. And flaming that they get wiped because of the overwhelming elites. They just need to cut them one by one, clear ing the stuff between each chain. No matter if you know that you can do that end event safely, if others dont care, it will be a wipe anyways.
2 Likes
Why not make “random book locations” a weekly mutation or a deed modifier, with mission failure criteria set at minimum 3-all books?
Yo Fatshark. Are these really the most pressing, or frequently raised issues/questions? That’s a serious question, not a veiled attack. It just doesn’t look much like what I’ve seen around the forums and Reddit, but obviously you have much better metrics of this than me.
As a side note, I know you guys have been burnt in the past when you tried to give specifics, but I’m not sure your current closed-off, vague way of communicating is doing you any favours, judging by the general Zeitgeist of these forums and the subreddit.
2 Likes
As an optionnal mode, why not. But I don’t really see the gameplay “fun” as you can drop without going back on several places without knowing if you had a book to find or not.
There was an earlier Q&A Q & A - Week 38 — Warhammer: Vermintide 2 where various other questions were looked at. We want some bigger meta questions as well as more specific questions with each Q&A.
4 Likes
For that they could use the boss doors thing, i.e., find a book prior to this point before being able to move on. Not something I’d wanna see in regular adventure mode.
The issue was not the DLC this time, the issue was the design of it, not listening to feedback, not even asking player (if fixed competitive weaves sound interesting) before starting to develop weaves and mainly, releasing it in horrible… just horrible state. It was not, not at all ready for release. Which is also imo major contributor to the overwhelmingly negative feedback. Because old players prolly just came back on release, saw the mess and were like “omg, this is the same old… I’m not playing this” And it took over month to get it to playable state, while currently there are still game breaking issues like weaves crashing, weaves not having enough enemies to finish them, pointless cheated leaderboards, ults just stopping to work, weapon switching being nightmare… and many many others.
If the design for weaves was little bit different, actually random weaves, or/and linked chunks of maps and featuring QP-able random weaves, one new reworked crafting system instead of adding second one and more pointless grind… If there wasn’t so many changes to core mechanics and therefore new broken stuff + extra old broken stuff. If there was actually some quick testing-feedbacking-tweaking loop running.
This could actually be great DLC/expansion. But there was so many, so big design issues, bugs and just general non-addressing of old mechanics that players wanted changed… that this result was very easy to predict.
Switching to micros might bring more money, but I have to say that issue with the WoM wasn’t the format.
7 Likes
This is not the same question so really not the same subject. They, indeed, did receive criticism on the first dlc because “everyone could access maps” so there was no point buying it. A bit better on DLC 2 but I also saw the same criticism coming back.
Therefore it’s not linked to the quality (or lack of) of thoses dlcs. This is another matter, and another question entirely =p
I would argue it’s both, if something like BtU was still bad in terms of $$$.
Since most people seemed to like BtU, I did like it. As for SoB the issue there was that it was only two maps after long time of nothing. That is not too exciting.
Also the way they did for example The Pit, did not make much sense. People want to run kill stuff and finish the map, not wander around, so it would be better to do one more map instead of making this one so big and ppl not really interacting with that content. It’s great that they used it now for weave chunks, but at the point of release it did look like poor value. 2 maps dlc and basically nothing else except for some challenges… which are not important at all. Those do not generate replayability.
So it was like
- DLC 1: 2 maps - not enough content after too long of a time.
- DLC 2: 3 recycled maps, 1 challenge map, new weapons - that was nice (at least from perspective of someone who did not play VT1, I remember ppl complaining that those maps are not really new, since they played them a lot in VT1)
- DLC 3: Just complete mess, hard to believe that it really got release like this, it was kinda suicide release and everyone who has eyes had to see it, but they still pushed it out and probably thought that it won’t be so bad or that they will be able to fix it in one first patch or something. I don’t know.
I really think the WoM could be really amazing, if they did the catching and throwing in terms of feedback, wasn’t so stubborn & of course communicated with internal beta testers and released it when it was ready. And if something sucked, they just … changed it or revered instead if pushing it anyway. Oh and… maybe not screw up more things (like temp HP, which is still broken…) when there was already lots of stuff to fix.
It’s the similar problems over and over, but with WoM in much bigger scale.
Even aside from DLC’s… like why isn’t there still checkbox button for Twitch 2.0 after fu… year and half. It’s these things everywhere. Super low hanging fruit, not getting fixed in ages.
They release amazing new thing and most people don’t even know they can play it… because they would have to do this stupid trick of connecting to some random streamer to get it active.
I don’t think microtransactions will somehow magically solve the underlying issue with the things I mentioned.
ps: Screw the Versus… when main game needs saving. Who in their right mind starts working on something like this when main game is bugged and has massive design problems with new content.
3 Likes
What I emphasize is that they’re answering another question that you’re pointing at. I don’t deny the bad state of release that could have been way better. I’m just stating that they adress an issue that WAS real.
Microtransactions won’t “fix things” magically. It’s free additionnal content, seasonnal (therefore without a too long wait), and cosmetic dlc to support it that could fix a lot of things =>
Seasonnal is pretty important, because it’s mean less content “at once” (which was the main problem of WoM that did throw a lot of changes “at the same time” making the balance very difficult, as well as the finishing of the new modes). It’s a nice shift, because the waiting between release was pretty long, and dropping less content, but faster means that it can be refined and less a mess than it was.
On this part, do you know the story of Fortnite ? 
I’m saying that you can’t really say the issue was DLC model, when all the DLC’s had big problems, that I mentioned. First wasn’t even DLC, was 2 maps, that’s like small update not DLC. Second a lot of ppl already played the maps that has been added and did not see that as new/exciting. And the last one was just epic failure in terms of design and forcing embarrassing hardly beta version on official realm.
There wasn’t single great DLC. The best one was BtU and probably only for people who did not play VT1. So looking back on these 3 and saying hey DLC’s doesn’t work, might not really be good assessment, because there wasn’t 3 great DLC’s. There was one and kinda only for non VT1 players.
If they continue same approach to the bug fixing, communication and creating random stuff instead of working on stuff people enjoy or want/changed fixed. Then no amount of microtransactions is going to help. I doubt that people are going to buy a lot of micros if they are pissed about general state of the game.
That was just dumb… they did not have to change 10 major things at once… when they didn’t have time to get even 1 done properly.
We had the balance & big bug issues and all the other stuff even when content was coming slow.
No.
1 Like
There was an issue that actually WAS the model. So yeah, they can say it’s an issue. This is not the only one, and I did agree, but one of the issue was exactly this. There WAS (and there IS) criticism about the dlc model that they try to fix.
First was 2 maps, 5 weapons, weekly quests, rewards for weekly quests (that, apart from the purpled hued weapons illusions, did contain one hat and one recolored model for each of the career). I mean, you can technically forget the purple illusions, but at least be honest on the content =p
Yeah and a lot of people did see that as new and exciting.
Taking one from several reddit posts :
https://www.reddit.com/r/Vermintide/comments/9wjdze/about_the_back_to_ubersreik_dlc/
“I picked up V1 a month or two ago when it was heavily discounted, it was tons of fun. Horn of Magnus in particular was great, the setting and atmosphere were top notch and I’m looking forward to seeing how it plays with the new careers and Chaos enemies.”
“as someone that has maybe the most hours spent on V1, i’am really looking forward to the old maps where it all began :)”
“there is no way they would get beastmen in here. Trust me, you can dream.” (This particular comment was funny, even if not on point :p)
Of course you find people that does not want rehashed map, but 1) there are not the majority 2) It happens, content will not please everyone.
The term is misused, it’s only cosmetic dlc, as in V1, the in game shop will be paid in shillings which are not bought, and the content from the shop and the dlc will not overlap (for now at least). This is important. And we’ll see how it goes.
Seasonnal stuff means more update, less content by update, so more prone to not have too much bugs at once. (there will still be bugs as in every game, but it’s a good practice to have set milestone for a big project like that from a technical standpoint)
Communication is better right now. We see thoses regular Q&A (that WE did ask for years) and they do not refrain from answering questions, even if several are “we’re working on it”, it’s still far better than nothing.
That was indeed a mistake. And seasonnal updates proves that they’re trying to not repeat the same. Will it works, maybe not, but at least, and I already said that, this is a good step.
So. Fortnite was a f2p coop game at first. Which was not working. Epic being behind (Unreal Engine) they had the budget, so they did drop some content, but the game was still not working. Only by adding the PvP (Versus) that game become the biggest hit ever. And even if I wouldn’t like to get the same community than Fortnite (please no !). Versus, IF done well (it’s a big IF) could draw more people by itself. Note that this is kinda one of the main difference between L4D2 and V2.
This, there was a clear lack of communication during beta, and providing feedback was not clear due to this. They could have done better, but it would have been better overall with less stuff at once. Feedback was all over the places, about all the new systems.
There was also an issue with playtesters as well, as they were stuck on some issue without adressing the others at all, and/or not taking the step back they needed from a feature they didn’t like. (ok you don’t like aethenor new system, don’t ask for this removal, it’s already done, this won’t go away, think a bit)
For example, fixed weaves were already designed and done, I did report that Weaves of Death were particulary flawed due to the wind having more impact than the others. It turns out that Weave of Invisibles is also an issue. Thoses particular feedback (that could have been adressed realistically) were erased from the thousand of posts about stagger system (:3) and fixed weaves (which couldn’t have been adressed realistically, they won’t remove something they spent months to include).
What could have been done is to ask some (not much, like 5/6) of the high end players (a few people that DO indeed play the game a lot) in advance, about their ideas they want to feature (with a NDA to prevent leaks) so the drawbacks can be pointed at BEFORE it’s fully set in stone, like this beta was.