Playerunknown's : Battlegrounds

FAILSAFE 00

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

But only an amazing achievement because it's a horribly coded piece of crap, from a technical POV.

...

I agree.

I think people are being unnecessarily hard on its first console build. They didn't take the best optimised game on the planet and port it to console and it performed poorly. They took a poor performing game and have created their first preview build of it for console.

SeanHarty

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I agree.

I think people are being unnecessarily hard on its first console build. They didn't take the best optimised game on the planet and port it to console and it performed poorly. They took a poor performing game and have created their first preview build of it for console.

But why is this good enough for anybody? I just don't get it.

If you going to release a game in alpha or beta then fair enough but don't make people pay for the privilege of it.

Falthyron

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I agree.

I think people are being unnecessarily hard on its first console build. They didn't take the best optimised game on the planet and port it to console and it performed poorly. They took a poor performing game and have created their first preview build of it for console.

You are missing the part where they charge money for such an opportunity.

The decision to bring PUBG to Xbox now is down to fear and greed. Fortnite is becoming very popular in a short space of time. BlueHole fear missing out on that money and the console presence another Battle Royale-type game is achieving. In many ways, this decision contradicts Brendan Greene's mantra (see NoClip interview) where he argues that he doesn't care what other developers are doing. To paraphrase: "We are making our game. We are not concerned about what other developers are doing. They make their game, we make ours." This only exemplifies how 'out of the loop' Greene actually is. I also saw an article posted today where BlueHole want to see tighter copyright restrictions being brought in (presumably in terms of genre iteration to protect their own property).

Lootboxes and paid keys in Early Access, in-game advertising in Early Access, and releasing a very poor port on Xbox in Early Access reeks of avarice. It's really simple lads: Finish. The. Fúcking. Game. If they do that, they can then charge whatever they want. If they truly believe their product is the best out there then charge appropriately and trust in the game you have made. Quit making cash for grab business decisions that reek of greed. There was absolutely no reason to release PUBG on Xbox now apart from the need to get in on that Battle Royale market before Fortnite dominates. The game isn't even finished on PC! They essentially ported an unfinished PC game to a console and its in a worse state. It baffles the mind and people are lapping that shít up and defending them. The psychology of buyer's remorse and loyalty is a fascinating study, but the real experts are those with the money to market these things.

Mickeroo

Falthyron wrote: »

You are missing the part where they charge money for such an opportunity.

The decision to bring PUBG to Xbox now is down to fear and greed. Fortnite is becoming very popular in a short space of time. BlueHole fear missing out on that money and the console presence another Battle Royale-type game is achieving. In many ways, this decision contradicts Brendan Greene's mantra (see NoClip interview) where he argues that he doesn't care what other developers are doing. To paraphrase: "We are making our game. We are not concerned about what other developers are doing. They make their game, we make ours." This only exemplifies how 'out of the loop' Greene actually is. I also saw an article posted today where BlueHole want to see tighter copyright restrictions being brought in (presumably in terms of genre iteration to protect their own property).

Lootboxes and paid keys in Early Access, in-game advertising in Early Access, and releasing a very poor port on Xbox in Early Access reeks of avarice. It's really simple lads: Finish. The. Fúcking. Game. If they do that, they can then charge whatever they want. If they truly believe their product is the best out there then charge appropriately and trust in the game you have made. Quit making cash for grab business decisions that reek of greed. There was absolutely no reason to release PUBG on Xbox now apart from the need to get in on that Battle Royale market before Fortnite dominates. The game isn't even finished on PC! They essentially ported an unfinished PC game to a console and its in a worse state. It baffles the mind and people are lapping that shít up and defending them. The psychology of buyer's remorse and loyalty is a fascinating study, but the real experts are those with the money to market these things.

I actually think it's more MS than Bluehole that are responsible here (in terms of the state of the game on console). They had no big exclusives all year and with a new console out they wanted a coup by nabbing the biggest game around and getting it out for christmas.

Falthyron

Mickeroo wrote: »

I actually think it's more MS than Bluehole that are responsible here (in terms of the state of the game on console). They had no big exclusives all year and with a new console out they wanted a coup by nabbing the biggest game around and getting it out for christmas.

Oh, you are definitely on the money there. MS are desperate for exclusive IPs that are successful. In fact, I reckon MS will eventually buy PUBG Corp/BlueHole in the same vein as they did with Mojang to get the MineCraft IP. Still though, how are MS marketing executives going to spin the current backlash coming from the Xbox community over performance? Their flagship premium console can't even run the game well enough for more than 30 fps. Personally, I think BlueHole weren't willing to say no to MS when they came along and offered a disgustingly large amount of money to keep it exclusive. Moreover, they probably didn't think twice when there was a bonus to put it out by the end of the year, irrespective of the state it was in.

Microsoft do take some of the blame, but BlueHole (given their practices on PC thus far) take most of it, imo.

Stone Deaf 4evr

I'm fascinated at some of the comments.

1. PUBG was released on PC on march 23rd, not even nine months ago yet. since then they've been updating the game and are on track to go to version 1.0 just before christmas.
2. Microsoft steps in and announces they're to get the game on their platform back around E3 - roughly 6 months ago
most AAA titles that arent call of duty have a build period of 4 years or more.

to take a (and lets be serious here) wonky mod, which had been expanded out into a game, and then turn it around in 6 months to even get it up and running - not to mind playable- on a vastly underpowered home console is an amazing feat. no doubt aided by the fact that microsoft have thrown money and engineering know how at it. What people need to realize is that Microsofts involvement will likely only benefit the games development as they have access to a way higher talent pool than bluehole could ever reach - the sea of thieves team consulting on the water tech for example.

The game is nothing short of a phenomenon, and with good reason. Its easy to put on your monocle and spout about how the battle royale genre isn't new or whatever, but PUBG has clicked with players in a way that none of the others have.

Falthyron

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

I'm fascinated at some of the comments.

1. PUBG was released on PC on march 23rd, not even nine months ago yet. since then they've been updating the game and are on track to go to version 1.0 just before christmas.
2. Microsoft steps in and announces they're to get the game on their platform back around E3 - roughly 6 months ago
most AAA titles that arent call of duty have a build period of 4 years or more.

to take a (and lets be serious here) wonky mod, which had been expanded out into a game, and then turn it around in 6 months to even get it up and running - not to mind playable- on a vastly underpowered home console is an amazing feat. no doubt aided by the fact that microsoft have thrown money and engineering know how at it. What people need to realize is that Microsofts involvement will likely only benefit the games development as they have access to a way higher talent pool than bluehole could ever reach - the sea of thieves team consulting on the water tech for example.

The game is nothing short of a phenomenon, and with good reason. Its easy to put on your monocle and spout about how the battle royale genre isn't new or whatever, but PUBG has clicked with players in a way that none of the others have.

Nobody is questioning the quality of the Battle Royale genre or the idea; the ire comes from the execution. Why did BlueHole feel the need to release a badly optimised game on MS's console now? Why not act like every other serious and proper developer looking to be published on a console and wait until the game is actually finished? Would you pay full price to play the next Call of Duty next week if it meant that the single player won't be playable, there are only ten guns, three maps, and two game modes? You get to play it now, but it is lacking content and it runs like shít? Is that the future of game release practices?

TerrorFirmer

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

most AAA titles that arent call of duty have a build period of 4 years or more.

Ah now in fairness, the game's been in development since the start of 2016 and it's hardly the most complex game around.

A single map, outdated graphics and fairly simple assests. You couldn't compare it to anything remotely like an AAA title or the work that goes into them.

Doesn't mean it's not a decent concept/fun, but let's be a shade realistic here.

Despite being one of the most popular games in the world it looks, runs and plays like it's made by a handful of people.

Bluehole are in it for the cash now, nothing else, and yes MS are just as bad in their desperate rush to secure a half decent IP for the XB1.

Stone Deaf 4evr

Falthyron wrote: »

Nobody is questioning the quality of the Battle Royale genre or the idea; the ire comes from the execution. Why did BlueHole feel the need to release a badly optimised game on MS's console now?

because they released a badly optimised game on PC and people lapped it up and praised it to high heavens, so why not try for more? they're a company after all, and profits are profits

Falthyron wrote: »

Why not act like every other serious and proper developer looking to be published on a console and wait until the game is actually finished? Would you pay full price to play the next Call of Duty next week if it meant that the single player won't be playable, there are only ten guns, three maps, and two game modes? You get to play it now, but it is lacking content and it runs like shít? Is that the future of game release practices?

But who is after paying full price? I only paid 30 euros, same as everyone on PC, full price games are 69.99 on the store. also, it quite clearly states , on mulitiple occasions that the game is in a preview state, and is not a finished product - I dont know how much more you expect them to do?

Stone Deaf 4evr

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Ah now in fairness, the game's been in development since the start of 2016 and it's hardly the most complex game around.

A single map, outdated graphics and fairly simple assests. You couldn't compare it to anything remotely like an AAA title or the work that goes into them.

Doesn't mean it's not a decent concept/fun, but let's be a shade realistic here.

Despite being one of the most popular games in the world it looks, runs and plays like it's made by a handful of people.

Bluehole are in it for the cash now, nothing else, and yes MS are just as bad in their desperate rush to secure a half decent IP for the XB1.

Genuinely not trolling , but theres more than a whiff of upset from PC players that resources that could have been spent on the PC version have been diverted to another platform.

Falthyron

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Genuinely not trolling , but theres more than a whiff of upset from PC players that resources that could have been spent on the PC version have been diverted to another platform.

Resource limitation is not BlueHole's problem. Its the lack of money being spent on fixing and finishing their game. I would prefer they threw 100m on the Xbox development because it might mean that the PC version will get some of that benefit.

Mark my words, there will be a new lootbox on launch day, or within the first week. You want to know where BlueHole's focus is? Its on making as much money as quickly as possible at the minimum cost.

challengemaster

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

lol. I am enjoying putting my feet up and playing it on the 55 inch 4K TV.
I'd be destroyed if I tried the same thing on the PC version using a controller :P
I do miss my mouse and keyboard but its nice to sit back and play on the big TV.

Deleted User wrote: »

There's certainly an appeal to that. It's annoying when I try do the same with the likes of Witcher 3 on PC that I can't read the text if I sit back.

There would be some appeal to that if it was some storytelling walking simulator type of game. But its not. It's a competitive survival/shooter game... yet on console people can't kill each other from 2 feet away with automatic shotguns. I couldn't enjoy that. It's amusing, in a circus sort of way. But not enjoyable.

Maybe that's just my competitive side though.

Grahamer666

My experience on the test server is always good bar a bit of rubber banding in the first few minutes. I'm getting a consistent 100+ fps in every game when i play on my 1080p display. Bit lower when i change to 1440p. Runs great so should carry over to 1.0 in a week.

challengemaster

Grahamer666 wrote: »

My experience on the test server is always good bar a bit of rubber banding in the first few minutes. I'm getting a consistent 100+ fps in every game when i play on my 1080p display. Bit lower when i change to 1440p. Runs great so should carry over to 1.0 in a week.

Crouch walking seems to stop the rubberbanding or at least drastically reduce it. Could be the advantage to get to a weapon first!

FAILSAFE 00

challengemaster wrote: »

There would be some appeal to that if it was some storytelling walking simulator type of game. But its not. It's a competitive survival/shooter game... yet on console people can't kill each other from 2 feet away with automatic shotguns. I couldn't enjoy that. It's amusing, in a circus sort of way. But not enjoyable.

Maybe that's just my competitive side though.

Can you at least give console gamers a few days to actually play the game
They aren't like Agent 47 programmed from birth.

You are making a lot of assumptions. Just like PUBG on PC I have met good players and bad players. There are people who also cannot shoot well on mouse and keyboard you know.

I don't use auto aim on controller for any console FPS. Games like Rainbow 6 Siege don't have aim assist on console. Aim assist can get you killed with its ridiculous pull when someone crosses in front of the person you are shooting.

Already I have seen massive improvements with the lads I play with on Xbox. Each day they are getting better and learning the game.

EoinHef

Falthyron wrote: »

Resource limitation is not BlueHole's problem. Its the lack of money being spent on fixing and finishing their game. I would prefer they threw 100m on the Xbox development because it might mean that the PC version will get some of that benefit.

Mark my words, there will be a new lootbox on launch day, or within the first week. You want to know where BlueHole's focus is? Its on making as much money as quickly as possible at the minimum cost.

The game is like €25,lighten up.

Its hardly a huge amount to ask for a game these days. If you dont like poor performance hold off and buy the game closer to release. If it doesnt sort itself out by then skip it.

DaveNoCheese

Got bullied into buying this last night by a few of the lads... First few games were atrocious! But steadily improving with each game. Finished the night with a duo game and I got to the top 5.

Can see how people are getting addicted to this game.

Falthyron

New Test Server patch notes:

http://store.steampowered.com/news/externalpost/steam_community_announcements/2442505391475926557

The console blur has been removed from what I can tell. The image is now crisp and clear at long distances.

James74

Right, had enough with solo and silent randomers on duo / squad... so if anyone wants to team up or has a space going spare then give me a shout. Wifey is away on her work night, Heineken is chilling, just need some friendly folks.

James74

So after a couple of nights teaming up with some fine folks from the depths of my boards Steam friends list (a couple of vagabonds going back +10 ten years!) this game is transformed by playing as part of a squad. The fun to be had with four hallions running around like headless chickens is priceless.

Thanks to the boardie gents that invited me to join them. Much appreciated.

Hal1

Whats up with the out of place menus on the main screen. This has been unplayable for the past 2 weeks or so since the last patch.

lewis

Here's my biggest gripe with this game, when I'm able to talk, or people can hear me, or if even the talk function works, my team mates are all from either China, or Spain or somewhere, where they don't speak a word of English, so trying to communicate with a non English speaking teammate, isn't fun.

The that's the other side of the coin, when in able to talk and the mic seems to work, no one is talking, or wants to talk....

lewis

lewis wrote: »

Here's my biggest gripe with this game, when I'm able to talk, or people can hear me, or if even the talk function works, my team mates are all from either China, or Spain or somewhere, where they don't speak a word of English, so trying to communicate with a non English speaking teammate, isn't fun.

The that's the other side of the coin, when in able to talk and the mic seems to work, no one is talking, or wants to talk....

Join us https://discord.gg/Q6VsS8M

Falthyron

Almost there...

Dcully

Will there be a price change after 1.0 release tomorrow guys?
I bought it when it came out at first but performance was so bad I got a refund but intended to return someday.

challengemaster

Falthyron wrote: »

Almost there...

Ripperino.. leaderboards will reset before 1.0 goes live :pac:

Dcully wrote: »

Will there be a price change after 1.0 release tomorrow guys?
I bought it when it came out at first but performance was so bad I got a refund but intended to return someday.

Haven't heard anything about price changes. Performance is much better based on the test server. My own PC is similar to yours, i5 6400 / GTX 970 and with settings on mostly high, I'm getting 80-100+FPS most of the time in TPP and occasional dips in FPP to 50 where certain areas or buildings aren't optimised.

Also it's 5 hour server maintenance starting at 6 PST and finishing 11PST, so the update for us won't be live until the 21st. Test servers are down during this time too.

madcabbage

Dcully wrote: »

Will there be a price change after 1.0 release tomorrow guys?
I bought it when it came out at first but performance was so bad I got a refund but intended to return someday.

Most likely as any other early access game has done so before. Look at ARK and the price that went to at full launch. Better to buy now on the cheap on cd keys and install the 1.0 patch later when it comes out

Mickeroo

Dcully wrote: »

Will there be a price change after 1.0 release tomorrow guys?
I bought it when it came out at first but performance was so bad I got a refund but intended to return someday.

It will probably go up to 60 quid.

Retr0gamer

Hasn't the full release been delayed until tomorrow now?

challengemaster

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Hasn't the full release been delayed until tomorrow now?

It wasn't so much delayed as they never mentioned the time zone of the release in the original statement.:pac:

Turns out its 11 PST 20/12 which is 7am GMT 21/12