11 replies to this topic

[4rcs1ne]

I'm creating this thread because I've been noticing a trend on PGI's part. To me anyways, it seems like PGI is making blind, poorly thought-out decisions with complete lack of fore-thought. PGI has transitioned to longer patch periods for better, well thought-out patches, yet the exact opposite is occuring.

Here are just a few examples:

1. Flamer Stun-Lock Meta

2. Archer's botched release

3. Awful changes to Conquest

Each of the previous cases could have easily been prevented by PGI using their test server. Why is their even a test server if PGI isn't going to use it?

Here's how a test server would have improved each of the three cases:

1. This one is obvious, the issues with flamers would have been exposed, and PGI could have made the necessary corrections with regards to the flamer bugs.

2. If the archer had been tested on the test server, PGI could have received community input on how the mech could have been quirked better.

3. This one is obvious too, this change to conquest would have been shot down from the get go due to the influx of negative feedback.

In conclusion, if PGI would just use their test server more often, botched mech releases, bad balancing, and terrible game mode changes would be prevented. I have to ask, why isn't PGI using their test server?

Edited by Matt2496, 21 March 2016 - 11:02 AM.

[Deathlike]

It's Lostech.

Really, it is.

However, some of these changes would need to have an incentive to be at the PTS, since less C-bills made per hour (with or w/o Premium Time) is ultimately the nagging reason.

[Jman5]

They've tried several times. Nobody shows up. They couldn't even get enough for a 12v12.

[4rcs1ne]

Jman5, on 21 March 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

They've tried several times. Nobody shows up. They couldn't even get enough for a 12v12.

True. However, even if people didn't show up, it would at least show that PGI cared about quality control.

[Jman5]

Matt2496, on 21 March 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

True. However, even if people didn't show up, it would at least show that PGI cared about quality control.

If all it took was a flip of a switch, then yeah. But PGI has said that it takes a good deal of effort to set up a test server so it's just not worth their time if people aren't going to show up to provide feedback.

[Deathlike]

Jman5, on 21 March 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

If all it took was a flip of a switch, then yeah. But PGI has said that it takes a good deal of effort to set up a test server so it's just not worth their time if people aren't going to show up to provide feedback.

That's not entirely true.

When feedback was provided, it was promptly ignored... multiple times.

So, the feedback loop is complete.. for the most part.

[wanderer]

Sure they do.

The game is so grindy that given no rewards, most people prefer to simply play the regular server.

That feedback used to often mean "NOPE, THIS GOES LIVE REGARDLESS" didn't help matters much either.

[Sug]

When they use it it's more of a Preview Server than a Test Server. Although we were able to give some good feedback the time they let us see the laser/sensor range / information warfare changes they were working on a few patches ago.

[4rcs1ne]

Jman5, on 21 March 2016 - 11:15 AM, said:

If all it took was a flip of a switch, then yeah. But PGI has said that it takes a good deal of effort to set up a test server so it's just not worth their time if people aren't going to show up to provide feedback.

Wouldn't letting people play their shiny new mechs early be enough of an incentive?

Edited by Matt2496, 21 March 2016 - 11:28 AM.

[Deathlike]

Sug, on 21 March 2016 - 11:26 AM, said:

When they use it it's more of a Preview Server than a Test Server. Although we were able to give some good feedback the time they let us see the laser/sensor range / information warfare changes they were working on a few patches ago.

I'm pretty sure Twitter won that battle/war and not the forums themselves.

[Gas Guzzler]

Deathlike, on 21 March 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

That's not entirely true.

When feedback was provided, it was promptly ignored... multiple times.

So, the feedback loop is complete.. for the most part.

At least it weeded out that laser ghost damage mechanic. Its a shame that so many days were wasted with people bringing 1000% missile cooldown quickdraws into matches.

It also seems that it does take a significant amount of manhours to set up the test server, so if they aren't going to get that many people on it isn't worth it. For little changes like buffing a flamer, I can see why it was not done. I would expect to see a PTS for the heat scale 2.0 thing, which I assuredly plan to be a part of.

[Deathlike]

Gas Guzzler, on 21 March 2016 - 11:50 AM, said:

At least it weeded out that laser ghost damage mechanic. Its a shame that so many days were wasted with people bringing 1000% missile cooldown quickdraws into matches.

Hilarity was had in those times.

This and the super-Executioner with the +300% torso twist or the Super Slow Enforcer (forgot which variant) that couldn't torso twist a lick.

Oh the experiments that could be run!