Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

More frequent updates?


fsp

Recommended Posts

I did paid beta testing in the past (as in: I got paid to do it) when I was young (and weighed a lot less )and was surprised to find an Alpha that was already so stable and had less bugs than some of the betas I participated in.

When I signed up for this Alpha, I expected much more frequent updates, e.g. weekly updates. I expected some of them to come with terrible bugs. Some of them to even make the game unplayable for a few days. I was fine with that.

I would have loved to have toyed around with an unfinished, even broken campaign so far. 

The devs have chosen a different path. Much more stable, but less frequent updates. 

With the release of the campaign coming closer, I would like to see more frequent updates, even if some of them break the game for a few days (so what?). I think that this might even help them develop things faster, with more people playing etc.

Then again I could be totally wrong and too many people would start bitching about game-breaking bugs/features and this game would get a bad reputation. In the end, they will probably know what's best for them.

Just here to say that I would not mind more frequent releases, even if buggy. It's an Alpha after all.

And please don't push them to go to Steam before the game is really looking good. Would hate to see it getting burried in bad reviews.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it would probably be nice to have more frequent updates. But: 1. you should be disappointed because of that. If you take a look at steam page of this game there is written that they'll try to release one update per month so I think it's unreasonable to want more frequent updates

2. Each update was followed by hotfix (at least i think all of them) that were mostly focusing on removing bugs caused by the update. I think it woul'd be really time consuming if they would release like three updates a month and repair bugs after each new release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fsp said:

I did paid beta testing in the past (as in: I got paid to do it) when I was young (and weighed a lot less )and was surprised to find an Alpha that was already so stable and had less bugs than some of the betas I participated in.

When I signed up for this Alpha, I expected much more frequent updates, e.g. weekly updates. I expected some of them to come with terrible bugs. Some of them to even make the game unplayable for a few days. I was fine with that.

I would have loved to have toyed around with an unfinished, even broken campaign so far. 

The devs have chosen a different path. Much more stable, but less frequent updates. 

With the release of the campaign coming closer, I would like to see more frequent updates, even if some of them break the game for a few days (so what?). I think that this might even help them develop things faster, with more people playing etc.

Then again I could be totally wrong and too many people would start bitching about game-breaking bugs/features and this game would get a bad reputation. In the end, they will probably know what's best for them.

Just here to say that I would not mind more frequent releases, even if buggy. It's an Alpha after all.

And please don't push them to go to Steam before the game is really looking good. Would hate to see it getting burried in bad reviews.

I'd gladly play a broken ass campaign right now.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Cdodders said:

Remember the dev team ain't that big, current rate of updates is pretty good

With quarentine I'd work for free just to help get the campaign out the door lmao.

Edited by BobRoss0902
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First, I am not disappointed, quite the contrary. I was thrilled when I saw how good the game already was when I joined.

I am by no means disappointed yet. I have confidence that the kinks will be worked out.

I just wanted to say that there is probably an internal update every other or third day and I wouldn't mind playing those, even if some of those are (and they will be) riddled with game-breaking bugs.

If that's more work to the devs, then that's obviously a no go.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will probs increase workload and strees, due to such a smoll team. Considering one model takes awhile to model, put modifiers on then actually uv unwrap, texture, rig, skin then animate this stuff can be very time consumin even more so if issues arise and the such.

i prefer the current update way since it actually means we get moar stuff to play with it actually being playable as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think the updates have improved many things in the game but also have ruined other parts of the game. its swings and roundabouts. as ive stated in another post I made, for me the game isn't right at the moment and ive stopped playing, ill wait for the next update.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The obvious solution would be to do what pretty much every other game like this does - have the 'good' updates on rare occasions, then a different version for the latest 'hot' update. Like minecraft does with its 'latest snapshot' option.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rule the Wave and IL2:BOS also balance large updates with routine bugfixes and small changes. The key to all of this is that the Devs have not announced a roadmap, or list of features they are hoping to implement before the 1.0 release. That would help tremendously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...