Jump to content

7.0 is confusing.... Lacks clear concise direction.


Alacoddd

Recommended Posts

I feel like they should have had a working concept to showcase.. This whole thing feels very indie dev, like we got presented an idea or proof of concept not yet fully realized yet but it completely changes the way you play the game and effects the entire balance of the game while also being told it will be released in 6 months.. With Bioware/EA recent track record with their IP's I'm not entirely convinced this will go very well.

 

Everyone here has opinions one what they think 7.0 is but no one knows what it actually is and how it will effect the future of swtor and frankly that's a bit scary. That dev stream should have been clear and concise the forums shouldn't be full of people going at each others throats for fear of the unknown. The PTS is a poor excuse of a testing environment the concept they have available was put together with duck tape and glue. It only offers to further confuse people.

 

They want so badly to "reinvent" swtor for their 10 year anniversary they are willing to rush and make sacrifices. This is only going to end one way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason nobody knows exactly what it will be like, how the balance will work, etc., is because its release is about five months away, and the final design *isn't* finalised. It *shouldn't* be finalised yet because they don't know yet if it's quite right, what the balance will be, and so on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If what we see on the pts is the most that they have completed, or even if this is what every class looks like behind the scenes, they need to delay release. Regardless of people's opinions on the changes, I think we can agree that finishing this in any way in 6 months is a big ask.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
The reason nobody knows exactly what it will be like, how the balance will work, etc., is because its release is about five months away, and the final design *isn't* finalised. It *shouldn't* be finalised yet because they don't know yet if it's quite right, what the balance will be, and so on.

 

I am not sure, but it sounds like you think this is how it should be or that this is a good thing in some way. Being a software developer allow me to enlighten you on a process called the software development lifecycle. What we are seeing on the PTS is the end of the lifecycle. All of the major updates and changes that will go into the next major update, have been implemented and tested internally, and the point at which scrapping the idea has long past. What was talked about in the livestream, is based on the internal process of the software development lifecycle that have already been finalized and will ship with the major patch update.

 

What we are getting is the final phase in the lifecycle where small tweaks and adjustments can still be made to the way the new features work, but the underlying functionality of those features, the major game breaking bugs, and the overall look and feel of the associated ui updates are already done and cannot be reversed, on this branch of development.

 

The only possible way that this feature does not make it into the update all depends on the build pipeline they have in place for the codebase. Assuming that major features like this exist on a separate branch of the codebase independent from any other feature, then there lies a chance that this feature does not get merged into the upstream codebase, and judging by the fact that we have a "simplified" version of it existing on the PTS without all of it being here, this tells me that is how the codebase is structured. They have pushed just this feature to the PTS branch and merged it into the PTS codebase, which explains why it does not function quite the way it should, as there are core elements that are modified to accommodate the PTS testing process that will not exist on the live.

 

Now with all that being said, what you should know is that this feature is finalized, and it was finalized a long time ago, long before we as the user base ever even knew it was coming. However, the feature is not complete, which is why they are asking for player feedback, to see what small tweaks they can make based on it so as to try to salvage some of the user base that will undoubtedly leave because of this. it happens with every expansion, and it is something they are prepared for and there will be something in these new features that will require more credits to use, which leads users to buy more items from the cartel market to sell in game for those credit so they can take advantage of the new features. That is how the economy works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve is a developer, but he doesn’t need me to defend him. Assuming someone isn’t experienced or qualified doesn’t win any arguments. At any rate, on topic:

 

1). Yes I agree that the concept of ability pruning and forced choices between several DCDs and mobility skills is going to stay. In other words, all classes should expect a nerf to the number of DCDs+mobility skills relative to what they have on LIVE. This concept/goal is “set in stone” as it were.

2). What we *MIGHT* be able to influence is which DCDs/mobility skills become forced choices and which ones stay because we make a case that they are “iconic” to the class or that their absence breaks the “feel” of the class.

3). In my opinion all of this is very hard to conjecture about except for, well, Onderon dailies, because I can’t imagine there have been a ton of warzone pops on PTS with only guardians and sentinels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2). What we *MIGHT* be able to influence is which DCDs/mobility skills become forced choices and which ones stay because we make a case that they are “iconic” to the class or that their absence breaks the “feel” of the class.

 

This is what I also believe the purpose of the PTS to be for this phase at least. Sure we the players could read off a list of changes and say, this won't feel like X class, but it takes actually playing the class with those changes to gather hard evidence and feelings. The issue with the PTS is that we don't have access to the actual challenging content like heroics, flashpoints and any PvP content (last part mainly due to a lack of players/ incentives to test the PTS). You can't test time to kill in PvP without actually playing PvP, and surviving vs a few mobs in a daily is vastly different to surviving vs 6 strong/elites in a heroic or an operations boss (though even vs basic mobs both guardian and sentinel felt less survivable imo).

 

From what Jackie has said in each feedback thread, feedback has been compiled and the devs are aware that guardian players think they aren't tanky enough and that both saber throw and reflect should be baseline, similar sentiments for sentinels. Now we have to wait and see if anything is done with this feedback and wait for the next stage where ABC choices are finalised and we are free to make our own choices rather than use the temporary AB paths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I also believe the purpose of the PTS to be for this phase at least. Sure we the players could read off a list of changes and say, this won't feel like X class, but it takes actually playing the class with those changes to gather hard evidence and feelings. The issue with the PTS is that we don't have access to the actual challenging content like heroics, flashpoints and any PvP content (last part mainly due to a lack of players/ incentives to test the PTS). You can't test time to kill in PvP without actually playing PvP, and surviving vs a few mobs in a daily is vastly different to surviving vs 6 strong/elites in a heroic or an operations boss (though even vs basic mobs both guardian and sentinel felt less survivable imo).

 

From what Jackie has said in each feedback thread, feedback has been compiled and the devs are aware that guardian players think they aren't tanky enough and that both saber throw and reflect should be baseline, similar sentiments for sentinels. Now we have to wait and see if anything is done with this feedback and wait for the next stage where ABC choices are finalised and we are free to make our own choices rather than use the temporary AB paths.

 

The issue with that is they will still pick other abilities to make players choose from so really is pick your poison or complain about 1 thing and get screwed when they make you pick between other choices. At some point you are going to be picking between helpful abilities you are use to. The system is not going to be scrap maybe some minor juggling around of abilities but be careful what you wish for because you might get what you wish for and it isn't quite what you thought you were going to get. Do i think they will change a few things perhaps do i think they will change things and anger more swtor players absolutely. It is the nature of the beast with online games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue with that is they will still pick other abilities to make players choose from so really is pick your poison or complain about 1 thing and get screwed when they make you pick between other choices. At some point you are going to be picking between helpful abilities you are use to. The system is not going to be scrap maybe some minor juggling around of abilities but be careful what you wish for because you might get what you wish for and it isn't quite what you thought you were going to get. Do i think they will change a few things perhaps do i think they will change things and anger more swtor players absolutely. It is the nature of the beast with online games.

 

I am pretty convinced that we will be forced to choose between at least some abilities, but I don't know if the devs would shuffle in other abilities if they take something like saber throw out of ABC. I'd also much rather we have to choose between one set of three abilities at level 70 than one set at 70 plus another two or three 'passive, passive, ability' ABC choices, so even if that's the result we end up with, it's better than saying nothing and losing all of them. I know the system isn't going to be scrapped and I don't want it to be, I like the ABC options for choosing passives, it's just the amount of abilities that you have to choose between (especially when choosing between a passive and ability) and also the fact that we have not been able to test these changes with the supposed NPC rebalancing. For all we know, we won't have to use a single defensive in an operation or flashpoint and so what would be the point of having say, four defensives on a class? (extreme example I know)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure, but it sounds like you think this is how it should be or that this is a good thing in some way.

Good or bad, this is how it *is*.

Being a software developer allow me to enlighten you on a process called the software development lifecycle.

I first learned about software development lifecycles in 1988 and I've been using them one way or another every working day (er, as a developer - you aren't the only developer who posts here) since then, so it's possible (not guaranteed, of course) that I know more about them than you do.

 

And next time, try to tone down the condescension, at least until you find out who you're talking to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...