Tripwire presents how to put your foot in it.

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

England4eva

Guest
This explains why big studios PR guys such as Bowling and Olin tend to say nothing most of the time angering the majority of people.

We have the flip side, Tripwire :-

Sorry guys you can't have it both ways. Either we cut down detail in the levels and it runs better for a wider range of people, or we leave the detail and then everyone complains about "OMG this game doesn't run as good as every other game I play that just happens to be a console port with low detail." And unfortunately, another symptom of almost all recent shooters being console ports is everyone just cranks there graphics up to Ultra no matter what hardware they have, then come crying to us that the game doesn't run very good on their 3-5 year old hardware. This being due to the fact that games designed to run on 5 year old console hardware usually run awesome on 5 year old machines on the highest settings.

Sorry to be blunt, but sometimes I have to :)
Source:
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showpost.php?p=901895&postcount=11

Full Thread:
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=65724

To be honest, in medium setting the game looks like a bag of spanners and plays about the same. To my untrained eye World at War looked better and ran a hell of a lot smoother.
 
Last edited:

rudedog

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
I'd rather have them say it like it is then say nothing.

To Tripwire :salute:
To CoD :rolleyes:
 

zeroy

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Location
Louth, Ireland
The post from John has not been overly well received i must say. For my part i blame the Unreal Engine for a lot of the performance issue. It is not the easiest engine to setup correctly on the Gamer side, just look on Steam forums or other and tweaks are almost always required: Homefront, Borderlands, Bioshock, BulletStorm, Batman Arkam Asylum, GOW, Mass Effect 2, etc....
 
E

England4eva

Guest
I'd rather have them say it like it is then say nothing.
Sure, but are they telling it like it is or are they failing to appreciate what people are saying? There are people with a range of systems from low to high end who are all suffering performance problems.

I like the game, but it seems poorly optimised. We usually moan about the five year old console ports being poorly optimised for the PC because that is exactly what it is, a port. This is a PC specific game, it should run like a sharp knife through warm butter.

They need to man up and fix their game instead of telling people to suck it up in their forums.

How none of this was seen in the closed beta baffles me. Perhaps instead of recruiting tripwire fanbois to beta the game they should of taken on board people who are prepared to call a spade a spade without fear of offending TW.

Its a similar thing to magazines who get invited to events and then give glowing reviews. Perhaps the beta testers rubbed their hands with joy that they sat in the inner circle that they didn't want to raise important issues for fear of seeing the boot.
 
Last edited:

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
Sure, but are they telling it like it is or are they failing to appreciate what people are saying? There are people with a range of systems from low to high end who are all suffering performance problems.

I like the game, but it seems poorly optimised. We usually moan about the five year old console ports being poorly optimised for the PC because that is exactly what it is, a port. This is a PC specific game, it should run like a sharp knife through warm butter.

They need to man up and fix their game instead of telling people to suck it up in their forums.

How none of this was seen in the closed beta baffles me. Perhaps instead of recruiting tripwire fanbois to beta the game they should of taken on board people who are prepared to call a spade a spade without fear of offending TW.

Its a similar thing to magazines who get invited to events and then give glowing reviews. Perhaps the beta testers rubbed their hands with joy that they sat in the inner circle that they didn't want to raise important issues for fear of seeing the boot.
Who says it was'nt seen the closed betas?
And as you have no idea what was said during that beta you are assuming an aweful lot.
TWI do not welcome beta testers who tell them nothing nor do they appreciate people who make wild accusations about a process they were not a part of.

Which frequently happened on the TWI forums just as you are doing now.
The truth is they had a deadline which was based around not releasing during October or November for obvious reasons.
So they did there hardest to release before then which they achieved all be it with some obvious issues..
Unlike HomeFront or Brink or even MOH all these issues will get fixed hence the patches we are seeing now..After that we'll start seeing FREE content and additional MP modes like campaign..The SDK will also be released..So all in all its about showing a litte patients and trust..

For those of us who have been around TWI for a while we know that RO2 will only get better and better because TWI will support the game in the long term unlike so many other dev houses.
 
E

England4eva

Guest
Who says it was'nt seen the closed betas?
And as you have no idea what was said during that beta you are assuming an aweful lot.
TWI do not welcome beta testers who tell them nothing nor do they appreciate people who make wild accusations about a process they were not a part of.

Which frequently happened on the TWI forums just as you are doing now.
The truth is they had a deadline which was based around not releasing during October or November for obvious reasons.
So they did there hardest to release before then which they achieved all be it with some obvious issues..
In all honesty its bullshit then. I understand the reasons for not wanting to release a game in the BF3, MW3 period but surely history has shown that trying to shove a game out the door ahead of another game never works well. We had Airborne shoved out before COD4, we had MOH(2010) shoved out before Black Ops. I don't think I need to say more to make my point.

Sorry but rushing the game out the door to beat their deadline doesn't cut it with me. Simple things like the sound cutting out each map change should of been sorted long ago.

The reason I ask what the beta was doing is because simple problems like that should of been ironed out. If basic issues like this didn't get resolved then the closed beta really failed what it surely should of been aiming to do?

I don't expect a perfect game on release (although 99% perfect in an ideal world) and I understand that developers have deadlines, but if it isn't going to be mainly complete and working in the time given then maybe unrealistic deadlines need to be scrapped.

People yadda on about games being more complex and studios being bigger etc etc, but then again so are budgets and so are team sizes. Its all in relation.

Don't get me wrong I'm enjoying this game an awful lot now, but really, can you find an excuse for something like the sound issue?

For those of us who have been around TWI for a while we know that RO2 will only get better and better
Isn't think part of the issue? I haven't been around TWI and many new players to the RO series haven't either. I don't know anything about what TWI is going to support or not support. All I as a consumer want is a working or mainly working game. Its ok for fanbois to run around telling me "its ok TWI will do XYZ" but it isn't really good enough.

Surely someone in your position involved in the competitive competition for RO can see that a game that has sound cut outs, major clipping issues through many surfaces can see that simple things like this can't exist, especially not where such sums of money are involved.

I shouldn't have to stop playing a game for the next 2 months to wait for it to be "fixed".
 
Last edited:

soulz2003

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
In all honesty its bullshit then. I understand the reasons for not wanting to release a game in the BF3, MW3 period but surely history has shown that trying to shove a game out the door ahead of another game never works well. We had Airborne shoved out before COD4, we had MOH(2010) shoved out before Black Ops. I don't think I need to say more to make my point.

Sorry but rushing the game out the door to beat their deadline doesn't cut it with me. Simple things like the sound cutting out each map change should of been sorted long ago.

The reason I ask what the beta was doing is because simple problems like that should of been ironed out. If basic issues like this didn't get revolved then the closed beta really failed what it surely should of been aiming to do?

I don't expect a perfect game on release (although 99% perfect in an ideal world) and I understand that developers have deadlines, but if it isn't going to be mainly complete and working in the time given then maybe unrealistic deadlines need to be scrapped.

People yadda on about games being more complex and studios being bigger etc etc, but then again so are budgets and so are team sizes. Its all in relation.

Don't get me wrong I'm enjoying this game an awful lot now, but really, can you find an excuse for something like the sound issue?



Isn't think part of the issue? I haven't been around TWI and many new players to the RO series haven't either. I don't know anything about what TWI is going to support or not support. All I as a consumer want is a working or mainly working game. Its ok for fanbois to run around telling me "its ok TWI will do XYZ" but it isn't really good enough.

Surely someone in your position involved in the competitive competition for RO can see that a game that has sound cut outs, major clipping issues through many surfaces can see that simple things like this can't exist, especially not where such sums of money are involved.

I shouldn't have to stop playing a game for the next 2 months to wait for it to be "fixed".
Completely agree.
 

Frag

Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Location
Ottawa, CA
In all honesty its bullshit then. I understand the reasons for not wanting to release a game in the BF3, MW3 period but surely history has shown that trying to shove a game out the door ahead of another game never works well. We had Airborne shoved out before COD4, we had MOH(2010) shoved out before Black Ops. I don't think I need to say more to make my point.

Sorry but rushing the game out the door to beat their deadline doesn't cut it with me. Simple things like the sound cutting out each map change should of been sorted long ago.

The reason I ask what the beta was doing is because simple problems like that should of been ironed out. If basic issues like this didn't get revolved then the closed beta really failed what it surely should of been aiming to do?

I don't expect a perfect game on release (although 99% perfect in an ideal world) and I understand that developers have deadlines, but if it isn't going to be mainly complete and working in the time given then maybe unrealistic deadlines need to be scrapped.

People yadda on about games being more complex and studios being bigger etc etc, but then again so are budgets and so are team sizes. Its all in relation.

Don't get me wrong I'm enjoying this game an awful lot now, but really, can you find an excuse for something like the sound issue?



Isn't think part of the issue? I haven't been around TWI and many new players to the RO series haven't either. I don't know anything about what TWI is going to support or not support. All I as a consumer want is a working or mainly working game. Its ok for fanbois to run around telling me "its ok TWI will do XYZ" but it isn't really good enough.

Surely someone in your position involved in the competitive competition for RO can see that a game that has sound cut outs, major clipping issues through many surfaces can see that simple things like this can't exist, especially not where such sums of money are involved.

I shouldn't have to stop playing a game for the next 2 months to wait for it to be "fixed".
You don't have to wait 2 months to "wait for the game to be fixed". You can stop your crying and just play the game as is and enjoy it for what it is right now. You even said you are liking playing it.

As you said, it would be nice if everything was fixed or 99% of it in a perfect world but guess what buddy.....the world is far from perfect! It's real easy for everyone who isn't involved in making a game to stand by and criticize what should have been done after the fact but unless you are a developer then you don't know the process.

Yes, you (us) as consumers of a game developers product (the game) are entitled to get what we pay for but as you know there are no set in stone guarantees that a game will be completely polished upon release. Should games be...hell yes but again..we are back to this imperfect world. :p
 

Tally

Banned
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
But he is completely right in not wanting to buy a game which is broken on release. Enjoying a game's gameplay despite all its problems shouldn't even enter into the discussion when wanting developers not to use the 6 months mandatory post release patching time as an extended development time.

To top it all, if the managers at TWI and the RO fanbois hadn't been making all kinds of claims prior to release about the superiority of HOS, then they could perhaps be given a little more leeway. As it is, saying things like "other AAA studios have a lot to learn from Tripwire", or "we don't make games the same way as other studios, who port their games from consoles", or even the now-laughable "HOS will not be rushed out the door, it will be released when it is ready", doesn't help their cause. This game WAS released before it was ready, and other studios have NOTHING to learn from Tripwire. Tripwire fell into the same development problems that other studios also fall into, and time constraints meant that they, like all the other studios, had to release before the game was properly ready, or would end up loosing money (I understand that Tripwire couldn't delay any more because they were running out of money. Fine, but that is the same for other studios as well. What sauce is good for the goose, is good for the gander as well).

If this had been Activision releasing yet another game in a semi-ready state, people would have been all over it like a fat guy on a candy bar, demanding that they go to the gallows for it. But because it is Saint Tripwire, apparently, we are supposed to forgive them for pushing a semi-finished game on an unsuspecting public.
 
Last edited:

Neil

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Location
Stansted, UK
But he is completely right in not wanting to buy a game which is broken on release. Enjoying a game's gameplay despite all its problems shouldn't even enter into the discussion when wanting developers not to use the 6 months mandatory post release patching time as an extended development time.

To top it all, if the managers at TWI and the RO fanbois hadn't been making all kinds of claims prior to release about the superiority of HOS, then they could perhaps be given a little more leeway. As it is, saying things like "other AAA studios have a lot to learn from Tripwire", or "we don't make games the same way as other studios, who port their games from consoles", or even the now-laughable "HOS will not be rushed out the door, it will be released when it is ready", doesn't help their cause. This game WAS released before it was ready, and other studios have NOTHING to learn from Tripwire. Tripwire fell into the same development problems that other studios also fall into, and time constraints meant that they, like all the other studios, had to release before the game was properly ready, or would end up loosing money (I understand that Tripwire couldn't delay any more because they were running out of money. Fine, but that is the same for other studios as well. What sauce is good for the goose, is good for the gander as well).

If this had been Activision releasing yet another game in a semi-ready state, people would have been all over it like a fat guy on a candy bar, demanding that they go to the gallows for it. But because it is Saint Tripwire, apparently, we are supposed to forgive them for pushing a semi-finished game on an unsuspecting public.
Agree 100%. I posted something similar on the BashandSlash forums:

Not talking about you but more about people in general who were trolling threads everywhere. It was difficult to post anything about a game one likes without it being hijacked with "RO2 will be this and that". So I apologise if I am now the one trolling but I have to read the same trolling posts about RO2 for the past year now on different forums.

I can pretty much guess why it was released they way it was or is. As you have pointed out it is more than likely that they were running out of money, and most likely time. I am not going to bash them for that as other studios suffer from the same things. All development studios have budgets whether they are independent or are backed by big publishing houses such as Activision or EA. Non-independent or large studios do have bigger budgets, that is a given, but they are not infinite and they too have deadlines to make as well.

I like RO2. Played it more than BC2 since it's release if I am honest and I play BC2 a lot. Will I say I love RO2, no I won't go that far, well maybe love for the rifles :), but it is definitely a break from modern FPS shooters. I won't say any more on this unless I have to, but I do hope that people take on board studios suffer from pretty much the same pitfalls; money, constant demand, resources and not enough time in the day. That is the lesson that should be learned ;)
 

Busterking

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Location
Espanola, Ontario, Canada
You don't have to wait 2 months to "wait for the game to be fixed". You can stop your crying and just play the game as is and enjoy it for what it is right now. You even said you are liking playing it.

As you said, it would be nice if everything was fixed or 99% of it in a perfect world but guess what buddy.....the world is far from perfect! It's real easy for everyone who isn't involved in making a game to stand by and criticize what should have been done after the fact but unless you are a developer then you don't know the process.

Yes, you (us) as consumers of a game developers product (the game) are entitled to get what we pay for but as you know there are no set in stone guarantees that a game will be completely polished upon release. Should games be...hell yes but again..we are back to this imperfect world. :p
There are 5 posters on these FPSadmin forums (always the same ones) that have been trashing RO2 all along. I just don't pay attention to their gibberish, it's really really getting old.
 
Last edited:

Neil

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Location
Stansted, UK
There are 5 posters on these FPSadmin forums (always the same ones) that have been trashing RO2 all along. I just don't pay attention to their gibberish, it's really really getting old.
No one is trashing RO2 or TW. Read what people have posted and you will see for yourself that people are posting contructive criticsm and not just looking at things blindly.
 
Last edited:

Neil

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2007
Location
Stansted, UK
Exactly



Read what BK posted and its true. If I make a comment or tell it like it is about BO or any other CoD game and just because I have RGN associated with my name I get slammed into the ground. Yet these exact same people who have turned fpsadmin into their personal soapbox can do what they please without anything happening to them.

Not trying to pick a fight Neil but the facts are; these same people can do as they please here and yet I, because of my RGN association, have to keep my mouth shut.

If I speak bad about BO or any other CoD game of the Saint IW/Treyarch all hell breaks lose but if these same people do the exact about RO2 its all fine and dandy. Seems more like a double standard here.

Now go ahead and slam away if you all must. Really doesn't bother me at this point. There are way more other important things to invest my time in and online gaming is not it. Its called real life and that to me is way more important than being on a site that is now over run with the soapbox derby boys.

Wizz
To be honest Wizz it has been happening to everyone no matter what their favourite game/publisher preference is, or who they are associated with. A member got banned from the forum just because he had a difference of opinion from other people here. Plus he put his arguments across in a constructive manner, which something you find only a few do in forums. Whether you agree or not with them is up to the reader. If anyone was slammed into the ground it was him.

As I said on BashandSlash forums, it happens in almost every forum you go to. You can't mention one game without someone telling you how brilliant another game is and shoving it down your throat. It then starts off this chain reaction where people start to look for revenge by replying to posts and intentionally saying "game x is better than game y" for whatever reason. In the past year or so, I can't remember seeing many threads where someone mentions BF3 then someone follows it with a comment about RO2 or even CoD, and vice-versa. I have never seen it this bad in all the years I have been gaming and if I am honest, it all started (imo) after MW2.

What Tally and England4eva are saying is that no developer is perfect and people should realise this before proudly booming that the developer they support is completely different. But I doubt that will sink in the double standards will continue throughout every forum.

I am not looking for a fight either Wizz :) I just want people to look at the bigger picture and not just look at it through RO, BF or COD tinted glasses.
 

zeroy

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Location
Louth, Ireland
The support from Tripwire is light years ahead of Activision/Trey/IW and EA .....

Actions speak louder than words and Tripwire has come across LOUD & CLEAR!
I dont think anyone is discussing the fact that TWI are supporting the game. If you look at the posts in the thread referenced in OP there are a lot of players with rigs above recommend specs who still have difficulties running the game. There is no denying that the game did not come out in a "finish" state.

Also, i havent seen anyone but a very small number of users here or at TWI slamming the game - something that anyway they are entitled to do.
 

steels

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
A member got banned from the forum just because he had a difference of opinion from other people here. Plus he put his arguments across in a constructive manner, which something you find only a few do in forums. Whether you agree or not with them is up to the reader. If anyone was slammed into the ground it was him.
That was total bs. I didn't agree with him most of the time, but he always posted in a respectful manner and not attacking like some of the posts I have seen here.



As for TWI, their fanboys have created this mess with all the pre game hype. Instead of referencing RO2 in every other game's thread, they should have just kept to themselves. Now TWI makes them look silly with this buggy release and the BF/COD guys are laughing pretty hard.

I am not putting TWI done, just pointing out the obvious to anyone that has common sense, TWI is like any other developer. This release proves that.
 

69thPaladin

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Location
RI, USA
I agree, the support is better. It's hard to beat patches getting release about every other day. In comparison to Homefront, where there were about 3 or 4 patches over several months.

However ... I'm pretty disappointed in this game. Maybe I'll change my mind, but to me, the movement is awkward and herky-jerky (not smooth) and the graphics aren't great. They are barely on par with 3 year old COD games. It certainly doesn't look like it's as good as with Homefront, or COD:World at War for that matter. I'm kind of surprised how many people have claimed these are top notch graphics and textures.

I also get a lot of lag, even with my settings all on medium. No idea what is causing that, but it's frustrating when it results in a death.

The browser issues drive me crazy. Any time I change any field in the filter, it stops seeing servers until I exit the game, then restart it only to have the same thing happen. It's broken. I finally gave up on the filter after wasting half the time I have to play the first few days due to having to keep restarting the game.

This trends of developers releasing game before they are finished (and before they work) are getting pretty old. This may be the last game I preorder or even buy upon release. I think I'll wait and sit it out and then read the reviews and see what problems get fixed prior to a new purchase.
 

Busterking

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Location
Espanola, Ontario, Canada
I agree, the support is better. It's hard to beat patches getting release about every other day. In comparison to Homefront, where there were about 3 or 4 patches over several months.

However ... I'm pretty disappointed in this game. Maybe I'll change my mind, but to me, the movement is awkward and herky-jerky (not smooth) and the graphics aren't great. They are barely on par with 3 year old COD games. It certainly doesn't look like it's as good as with Homefront, or COD:World at War for that matter. I'm kind of surprised how many people have claimed these are top notch graphics and textures.

I also get a lot of lag, even with my settings all on medium. No idea what is causing that, but it's frustrating when it results in a death.

The browser issues drive me crazy. Any time I change any field in the filter, it stops seeing servers until I exit the game, then restart it only to have the same thing happen. It's broken. I finally gave up on the filter after wasting half the time I have to play the first few days due to having to keep restarting the game.

This trends of developers releasing game before they are finished (and before they work) are getting pretty old. This may be the last game I preorder or even buy upon release. I think I'll wait and sit it out and then read the reviews and see what problems get fixed prior to a new purchase.

The graphics are awesome set on ultra settings, but if you have your settings all on medium like you said then yes, they won't look great to you so you shouldn't be blaming the game if your computer doesn't have the hardware to run it on max settings.
 

ButchCassidy

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
I don't expect a perfect game on release (although 99% perfect in an ideal world) and I understand that developers have deadlines, but if it isn't going to be mainly complete and working in the time given then maybe unrealistic deadlines need to be scrapped.
Now your really confusing me..lol....The game works and runs fine the vast majority of people..There are bugs but nothing game breaking just niggles.

Now if you could not play it I could understand..and if they were not actively patching the game I could understand..But neither are the case..So your moaning about what exactly?

As a consumer TWI did give you a choice..More than many other companies give you I might add.
You could pre-order the DDE version play the beta and if you failed to like the game in anyway then you could cancel that order.

I don't remember having that choice with Black ops or HomeFront or Brink?

With regards to beta testing..

The Closed Beta ran for several months and gradually got larger.
Many many things were fixed and a redone as you would expect.
And your assumptions about that process are just that uniformed assumptions.
You were not there so your spouting about something you know nothing about.

On the other hand when the DDE open beta came many thousands joined the beta process and again many things were tested and fixed.
I seem to remember the DDE beta getting around 4 builds in three weeks in order to test every map in the game etc.
The process was open with TWI asking players to continually post their problems in the TWI forums...
As for the sound glitch you seem to be having that did not appear until post release and seems to have been introduced as part of an optimization patch that fixed one thing and broke another..
I believe this may have now been fixed..

When did you last take part in a beta for a COD game on PC?
Or a beta that actually was a beta of the entire game instead of a demo with one map.

On the one hand your critizing TWI for being like any other developer and yet how many other developers have actually provided you with an opportunity to play a full beta of their entire game spead over several weeks..

I don't remember TWI saying anywhere that they were not going have to patch the game after release.
I don't remember TWI saying anywhere that their game would be "A perfect release"

What I do remember them saying is their intention to support RO2 long term not just for a couple of months.
I also remember this being stated many times in this forum that TWI's support was far better than many other AAA dev teams.
I can find nothing in any posts I have read here that contradict that other than peoples opinions and everyone has got one of those.

So on the whole the evidence simply does not support your argument that TWI are like all other dev teams.
They clearly are not..
But hey..Your entitled to your opinion and so are many others but try not to get them mixed up with facts..

Finally if you feel you have real concerns then try posting them over TWI's forums..OR try pm'ing John Gibson on these forums..Bitching here won't get their attention.
 
E

England4eva

Guest
I don't remember TWI saying anywhere that their game would be "A perfect release"
Oh right, it must just be me that expects when a product is on the shelf it is a) finished and b) works.

Not that it will be completed a few days or weeks later.

Perhaps the faults don't sit with TWI then? perhaps they fall at the feet of the inept beta testers who rather than bug testing sat all giddy because they were part of the secret inner circle.

I think you'll find that the thread I linked to shows quite a large portion of unhappy customers who the game just doesn't run right for and a seriously poor public relations reply from a TWI guy. You've failed to see that I didn't start this, I basically just linked to a post from a bunch of people disatisfied and highlighted the poorly worded reply from TWI.

I don't expect you'll understand any of this though because you are the ultimate TWI fanboi and so your opinion is very bias, I on the other hand have no association with any developer so don't have any axe to grind.
 

MaydaX

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Location
St. John's, CA
I have a decent system (i5-2500K and a 460 GTX) and I have not had too many issues so far.

I absolutely hate WW2 games and I could never get into them. Most I would last is 15 minutes and I would remove it. RO2 was the first WW2 game I actually played for hours. It's different and I like the cover system, blind fire, free aim etc. I still don't play it a lot but when I do I enjoy it much more then other WW2 shooters I've played.

I also like the fact TWI put thought into their anti-cheat policy instead of just contracting PB or VAC and thinking that's all they needed. Having both PB (3 levels) and VAC while also coding anti-cheat functionality into the game (ex speedhack kicker) really shows they want to make their game as cheat free as possible. It's also nice having steam and HLDS update the PB files for both server and client. TWI has raised the bar for anti-cheat in a game.

The game has issues and I hope TWI gets the game sorted because I really think it has a lot of potential and last for years to come. Based on my experience with the closed beta, I'm confident they will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom