In no way I want just hate on or bash the developers, as in modern Software Engineering, they are not even in charge of making important decisions, like when and what to release.
Your observation and personal experience, that games that are in a "bad" state are released, is not justifying this practice. It is still bad practice in my opinion.
As I wrote some more than 10 lines of code myself, I know that the dream of bug-free software is nothing more than a dream. Bug-free software is only possible under very specific circumstances and is quite expensive - unless the developer isnt just very very lucky.
How come all this stuttering is not detected while testing, if there is any (testing)? If I do not want to say its the devs (or company's) fault, i.e. that the software (patch) was released intentionally, then the only explanation is that this is open beta testing, with pay-to-play.
Also as a (former) developer yourself, you might be biased, when looking at responsabilities. You might say that the game (=the software) does not even launch is the fault of the users that installed the 3rd party mods, or the developers of said mods. So responsible for all this are the users or someone else NOT the game devs. But... in fact the game does not only allow but more like encourage such third party software, and the game update routine is automatized in a way, that an average user is not able to prevent problems with these (then, only after the update, broken or outdated) mods. In my opinion in this case, it is the responsability of the developers to either make the game such that is is compatible with mods after the patch that it was compatible with before the patch, or change the update routine...
Why not having something like a "safe mode", i.e. if the game detects a crash (because of a third party modification), it "disables" all mods, and tries to launch again? (Informing the user about this of course). Why not having a routine, that is able to detect compatibility with old mods?
Like the game tries to launch, enabling more and more of the installed/subscribed modifications?
Again, I do not think one can test this game 100% for bugs, and if there are crashes from time to time it is "perfectly fine", but a game crash should be the exception, not the rule.
And finally AGAIN, I do not say, this is all the devs fault, but also company policy. But does that mean users are not allowed to complain about that?
I feel like most software in gaming today is produced to only make fast cash, and then trash it. Maybe its a pattern today that you produce bad software, that gets worse and worse with every update (not saying it is the case here in particular) so that you can sell the successor game, and do not have to maintain the old software?
You just need to change your hotkeys it takes 3 seconds.I want to rotate Gates with Mousewheel and zoom with CTRL + Mousewheel
Edit: Actually nvm
But can u change the hotkeys of it (i want it vise versa)
Wow, there they are, at the bottom after all building hotkeys - they hid them well 11You just need to change your hotkeys it takes 3 seconds.
Sorry for assuming that. Still I think releasing software in bad state is bad practice.First of all I never said that I was a game developer. More so I am a data scientist and was more involved in the decisions what to release, which features to add and such as the loud audience rarely speaks for the majority.
Thank you for sharing your opinion on this with me.Again, you claim the game is in open-beta, pay-to-play even, which is not true. (...)
I don't know why they do not release beta patches first which is at least possible in steam so that not everyone automatically gets them and you can return to the old version worst case.
Where did I call them unfitting names?My main point here is that instead of diminishing the game and the developer (meaning the company) by calling them unfitting names, you should rather make constructive suggestions how to improve it while being aware that they might be dismissed due to cost reasons or that your opinion does not reflect the majority of players.
Players refuse to go random civ.
Why not enabling the functionality, that some players can opt-in into a "beta"-program, and receive patches early, to test them
They dont need a beta to see those bugs, they just need a dude that records some clips for the yt video coming with that patch. They could have also just delayed the patch to the usual last tuesday of the month, which was also mappool rotation day and we all had had less troubleMaybe because they would need to setup additional/parallel infrastructure for it that is costing them additional money that they don't get from Microsoft? I can't see any other obvious reason why after NINE month of patches that brought the craziest bugs they haven't done it.
Maybe because they would need to setup additional/parallel infrastructure for it that is costing them additional money that they don't get from Microsoft? I can't see any other obvious reason why after NINE month of patches that brought the craziest bugs they haven't done it.
I would not allow all players to opt-in for the beta, and you would think they have some kind of infrastructure, how would they test the software otherwise. (Again we are at the core problem it seems)
I think it works very well.the random civ button is a cute idea, but does not work at all. people nowdays are just used to picking maya, india, khmer and briton for every game. not only is it boring but also it is very frustrating to play against, if you dont go for those civs. and in a vast majority of games people do not go for random (that i can absolutely not understand, since this is a big part of the beauty of the game to me. different civs, require different strategies, and with maybe "bad" positioning for flank and pocket civs you might need to come ahead with out of the box strats). so maybe just get a queue for people that actually want to play random civ. or if one has random activated and the other not, make it 50% chance (for TGs if 75% have it activated and 25% no make it 75% for random).
I think it works very well.
Ranked ladder is supposed to be civ pick - even more people go for that, it is because people like to pick their civs.
To be honest, I even advise my friends who start playing the game to pick a civ and stick with it for a while. You can't expect the average player to know how to play all 35 civs. Yes, they are not as different as they are in something like Starcraft - but there are still a lot of things to know. Additionally this game as a lot to learn anyway. So it's nice if you can eliminate some of it for a while.
Once you got to know the game and all its civ to at least some extent I agree. Random mirror is a lot of fun and I personally always have it enabled. I just think we should be a lot more thankful for the newly received possibility of playing random mirror and a lot less angry at the fact that we cant force everyone to play random mirror. I would not want to do that if I was a newer player.
Also in my 1v1 games (1500-1600 elo) i get random mirror more often than not.
I think once we get used to the random mirror option and people see on streams how fun it is, it will probably slowly increase in popularity.
TL;DR: Picking civ is a better forced option than random mirror. So I think it's just perfect if we have that better option (for the whole player base, which includes a lot of casual players) as the forced one, but still have the possibility to agree on random mirror.
Mainly because random mirror sucks for 90% of the player base.Why should ranked ladder be picked civs? It never used to be that way on either voobly or HD. Wouldnt it be a more precise elo if you do not play S tier civs only but can also get wins with others in hard matchups?
At the level I play everyone knows every civ very well. I play 1v1s very rarely since i dont think it is as much fun as TGs, but in the 6 i played since the random option is out i got exactly 1 random civ game. TGs are about the same. Rarely i get to play random civs and the civs that people pick are always S tier.
Civ picking has always been a thing outside of voobly MS.Why should ranked ladder be picked civs? It never used to be that way on either voobly or HD. Wouldnt it be a more precise elo if you do not play S tier civs only but can also get wins with others in hard matchups?
HILARIOUS 11With the new features, i always pick the best civ for the map and activate the "random" option. I get random civ matchups 70% of the time.
Mainly because random mirror sucks for 90% of the player base.
But also for the same reason favorite maps were introduced: Let people play what they want to play, as long as they find other people who want to play the same thing.
And no, elo wouldn't be "more precise" if it was always random civ. It would just measure a slightly different thing.
HILARIOUS 11
Think about it, you put the "random civ button" indicating you want to play with random civs. AND THEN YOU CAN CHOOSE your civ with that option on 11
Shouldnt it grey out if you enable that options?
"Yeah i want random civ, but only for my enemies so they have an disadvantage" 11
And i cant even play the game in english 11 Always in german even tho in the Steam property settings i set it to english
Yeah, were is the logic in that? I mean shouldnt it be a democracy? or atleast if 6 players want random civs then its random civBut if in a 4v4 only 1 player choses to pick civ and does not activate the random button, everyone has to play picked.
Sorry, but this seems wrong on so many levels.Why did people play random civs for about 20 years when it sucks to them?
You get to play what civ you want. You just don't get to force other people to play what civ option you want them to pick.And even if that is the case, i do not get random civ matchups the way it works right now. So people do not get what they want to play.
Once again. From my perspective of a very experienced player I would like that.Imo they could improve the random toggle:
This should let civ pickers play among themselves and let the rest of us play random civ...
- Majority choice should always win
- A tie should default to random civ.