Is GGG getting a pass on development issues? If so is that fair?

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

Jiero wrote:

And yes, with the high profile it has on the steam store that includes auto-updating + a web browser in game (for checking poe.xyz in game) I suspect that most of the user base has moved to the steam version and each day more of the old client base either quit or moved to steam.

I agree with the logic, but it isn't so.

To add on, about the steam users.... if they launch the game directly from its steam folder (instead of steam client or default shortcut) it doesn't count as a steam launch (steam client and overlay don't start up) and that is what a LOT of steam users tend to do to cut down on overhead unless we plan on trading a lot that day. It would be counted as a stand alone client launch when it was actually a steam client. We also do this with the auto updating steam client so we can use stuff like sweetfx or anything else that uses an overlay because they conflict.

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

I understand. You don't know me, and why should you trust me. That's cool. Why not be skeptical? I really don't understand why more players DON'T use the steam client.

Would you take the more publicly vocal Charan's word for it?

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

It's been just under half a year since launch. Chris confirmed recently that on a typical day, over 150,000 accounts will log in; concurrency can be as low as 15k players and as high as 50k.

The problem is that these numbers are not backed up by any tangible evidence or feeling. The steam graphs show a continual decline. Numerous high level guilds see their numbers falling instead of climbing. People report that their friends lists are emptying out. Public parties are scarce compared to even a few weeks ago. I can say that out of the dozen or so people I've introduced to the game, I'm the only one that's still playing. And there are many people with similar stories. Trading is harder because there are fewer people buying gear.

Now if you want to believe that the game is just as active as ever, that's certainly your prerogative. But until GGG releases the actual figures and/or gives people a method of telling for themselves (e.g. an /online command), the prevailing sentiment is going more important.

60k concurrent users peak is nothing to be proud of anyways.

that's super peas even from an indie point of view

so even if you were to give them the benefit of doubt, those are not in any way stunning numbers

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

Nobody has the actual stats that you're looking for, though. GGG might.

Indeed, they do. Why wouldn't they?

Because frankly I haven't seen much that suggests GGG actually monitors statistics and/or provides performance metrics of any kind.

If there is one stat GGG would monitor though, it would be the number of people playing, so who knows.

EDIT: just saw the quote about a developer stating the usage stats, so apparently they do keep those

"

UnderOmerta wrote:

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

I understand. You don't know me, and why should you trust me. That's cool. Why not be skeptical? I really don't understand why more players DON'T use the steam client.

Would you take the more publicly vocal Charan's word for it?

"

CharanJaydemyr wrote:

It's been just under half a year since launch. Chris confirmed recently that on a typical day, over 150,000 accounts will log in; concurrency can be as low as 15k players and as high as 50k.

The problem is that these numbers are not backed up by any tangible evidence or feeling. The steam graphs show a continual decline. Numerous high level guilds see their numbers falling instead of climbing. People report that their friends lists are emptying out. Public parties are scarce compared to even a few weeks ago. I can say that out of the dozen or so people I've introduced to the game, I'm the only one that's still playing. And there are many people with similar stories. Trading is harder because there are fewer people buying gear.

Now if you want to believe that the game is just as active as ever, that's certainly your prerogative. But until GGG releases the actual figures and/or gives people a method of telling for themselves (e.g. an /online command), the prevailing sentiment is going more important.

I think this may be the case more in Invasion than Ambush, as a random observation. I have heard that invasion is dying at an astronomical rate but ambush seems relatively strong

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

Because frankly I haven't seen much that suggests GGG actually monitors statistics and/or provides performance metrics of any kind.

If there is one stat GGG would monitor though, it would be the number of people playing, so who knows.

GGG seems to monitor even minor details about game metrics. If you do a bit of snooping around you can even find information dropped by several devs that reveal some interesting things they track...

I'd be really interested to see what those might be.

Judging by the performance of some of the under-used skills, I can't imagine they actually monitor the usage of poison arrow, reave, cold snap, viper strike, arc, arctic breath, etc because those skills receive only niche or supporting use, while it is a well known fact that leveling with searing bond or ST is the way to go, so probably everyone uses one of those skills at some point.

And I'm ok with some skills being better than others, or being a prime leveling gem or a supporting gem, it's just that the gap between usage for these skills is so great I can't imagine anyone is actually tracking metrics on them, especially at end game. And some of these are definitively not designed as support skills.

"

tinko92 wrote:

"

TheTenthDoc wrote:

How long have you played the game that you think nothing at all has been done at all about desync or graphical issues? I'm genuinely curious, since that was some of their big changes going from beta->release, especially the graphical issues.

Yes, the situation is now unbelievably worse. Big change, I agree.

tinko92

Joined:
2. Juni 2013

Yeah right, you know that because you've been around in Close Beta and early Open Beta to comment on this topic HAHA.


On topic:

Nope. Free pass no, but I am rather patient.
You know. I love the game, it is what I want to play and I want GGG to succeed. And I want them to fix the problems in the game. But yes I understand their budget and developer size limitations.

Good thing though is I follow what Chris says in interviews to know how they want to take these things.

like when Chris said they won't put in bad graphic settings because then he thinks they will never fix it since that would fix the problem. But he wants the game to be optimized without compromise.

While I can see where he is coming from I think it is healthier for the game if they give us temporary solutions like /oos and reduced graphic settings, until they are fixed.
Because who knows which player might never come back just because those things scared them off?

"

KenshiD wrote:

tinko92

Joined:
2. Juni 2013

Yeah right, you know that because you've been around in Close Beta and early Open Beta to comment on this topic HAHA.

Beta =/= "Close" Beta, early Open Beta.

You just love to embarrass yourself.

THey've been getting a pass for nearly 4 years now...

The people not giving them a pass have their criticism thrown into dead forums so no one else can read.

The 20ish or "Supporters" who spam critique threads with fanboy vengeance basically turn those threads into spam and get them moved as well.

There's a reason the playerbase keeps dropping...

It's really hard to attract AND keep new players when they find the game to be fundamentally broken at a core level within the first few minutes of playing...

This game is basically being supported by a small number of people who continually shell their money for pretty titles and then ask for more pretty titles.

What could have been a great game, was basically ruined by those people who GGG realized they could skate by catering too...