A Question for my fellow COD lovers

[Madfish]

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

When the sequel is released which in turn will bring in more (we hope) money that money will be used to fix the 'known' problems with an array of Beta patches like we have now

Am i on the right track here?

Adding to what warhound just said and what I believe sounds plausible: honestly, I don't know.

The reason is simple. The old IL2 sprung a few projects which licensed their engine.
We also got some hints towards some sort of massively online game that also involves ground.

I can't tell you if they purely focus on the new sequel or simply on the engine overall. As we heard the coder part is working on CloD which suggests that they are trying to make the engine part run well.

It's still possible that "CloD" will work like IL-2, meaning you get updates but need the sequels. But I can't say for sure.


What I can say for sure is that they need sales. Either the sequel or licensing the engine.



Sorry that the term Beta wasn't that known to you. Maybe it's just so natural to me since I am a bit involved with gaming since a long time. And frankly, I've seen much worse games than CloD which sold A LOT better.

[Blackdog_kt]

I'll have to partially agree with this:

Originally Posted by Warhound

It's the community who hypes these patches to hell and then acts all annoyed when they don't get what was expected, NOT promised except for a few rare instances.

even if i would phrase it in a bit less "pointy" manner, simply because a lot of people expect beta to be gameplay material.

In reality, alpha/beta means "you can test it if you want to and help me find what's wrong with it, but don't expect it to be flawless and final material".

A lot of people however will download the patch thinking it is finalised gameplay material and then they will of course be disappointed because it's not. By definition.

So, to answer the original poster's question. This patch is not meant to be the fix-all patch. It's just one step in the testing process of the fix-all patch. Cheers

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I'll have to partially agree with this:



even if i would phrase it in a bit less "pointy" manner, simply because a lot of people expect beta to be gameplay material.

In reality, alpha/beta means "you can test it if you want to and help me find what's wrong with it, but don't expect it to be flawless and final material".

A lot of people however will download the patch thinking it is finalised gameplay material and then they will of course be disappointed because it's not. By definition.

So, to answer the original poster's question. This patch is not meant to be the fix-all patch. It's just one step in the testing process of the fix-all patch. Cheers

That's a good try but, in the long, a wasted effort as you won't get through to them.... They'll read into what is posted what they want to read (regardless of what was posted) and their expectations will morph facts into fantasy (hence the OP)



TBH, there are better behaved children at the local kindegarten.....

[PotNoodles]

Originally Posted by Wolf_Rider

That's a good try but, in the long, a wasted effort as you won't get through to them.... They'll read into what is posted what they want to read (regardless of what was posted) and their expectations will morph facts into fantasy (hence the OP)



TBH, there are better behaved children at the local kindegarten.....

I think we are stuck between a rock and a hard place here because even without the beta the game has bugs. I guess it's a down to which buggy game you prefer to play in the end. The awful stuttering from day one of the game, or the launcher exe crashes that I'm currently experiencing with this beta patch. That's not the best choices to have, but I'm sure you will find a way to disagree with that. But maybe that's the reason people don't think they have a choice other then to download the beta patch and try to make the best of a bad situation. Now I don't think that is morphing the facts into fantasy, do you?

Originally Posted by PotNoodles

I think we are stuck between a rock and a hard place here because even without the beta the game has bugs. I guess it's a down to which buggy game you prefer to play in the end. The awful stuttering from day one of the game, or the launcher exe crashes that I'm currently experiencing with this beta patch. That's not the best choices to have, but I'm sure you will find a way to disagree with that. But maybe that's the reason people don't think they have a choice other then to download the beta patch and try to make the best of a bad situation. Now I don't think that is morphing the facts into fantasy, do you?

+1

[Ze-Jamz]

Originally Posted by Madfish

Adding to what warhound just said and what I believe sounds plausible: honestly, I don't know.

The reason is simple. The old IL2 sprung a few projects which licensed their engine.
We also got some hints towards some sort of massively online game that also involves ground.

I can't tell you if they purely focus on the new sequel or simply on the engine overall. As we heard the coder part is working on CloD which suggests that they are trying to make the engine part run well.

It's still possible that "CloD" will work like IL-2, meaning you get updates but need the sequels. But I can't say for sure.


What I can say for sure is that they need sales. Either the sequel or licensing the engine.



Sorry that the term Beta wasn't that known to you. Maybe it's just so natural to me since I am a bit involved with gaming since a long time. And frankly, I've seen much worse games than CloD which sold A LOT better.

No worries mate, i know what a Beta is but i guess im just confused as to the situation.. i dont read every thread here which would of partly answered some questions...

Some nice replys here and a bit more of an insight for me..

@Wolfrider
Take yer attitude somewhere else and yer insults too