PUBG - PlayerUnknown's BattleGrounds [XO, PS4]

[Billy Idol]

Early Access is another way of funding games that likely will not get funded by larger publishers.

After all the scrutiny of Lootboxes and all the big calls for finding other ways to fund games, I didn’t expect people to attack early access.

I do not attack the early access, and think that this is a good strategy. However, early access should have a clear time line and the goal to get out of early access...which some of the games do not have it seems. I sure would hope that with the millions they did make with this game already that they can hire some people that know gaming technology and know how to improve...I guess this is a legit concern, right?

But somehow this game shows how luck based game development has become nowadays...bring the crappiest looking game ever, framerate issues even on the biggest PCs, console version downright broken with fps in the 10s...but nail the gameplay and especially the freaking game feeling, people getting hyped and you have the biggest seller in a decade...kinda crazy and cool at the same time imo! I want to be on board of this crazy hype train!!!

 

[AlNom]

Basically kickstarter... some are handled better than others, of course.

They certainly have their work cut out for them on console. :|

 

[Scott_Arm]

I'm not big on paying for potential, but obviously with this game it manages to strike the right balance of gameplay to resonate with gamers. At some point, they'll need to fix a lot of the issues, because people do expect it to improve. Or someone else will come along and do the same thing as a more finished product.

Other games though, they'll sell early access, take the money and flounder forever. That's why I'm not big on buying into early access/preview.

 

[iroboto]

I sure would hope that with the millions they did make with this game already that they can hire some people that know gaming technology and know how to improve...I guess this is a legit concern, right?

They're trying their best to hire talent that can help them I'm sure. They don't have the expertise available to make a game at this scale yet. If you think about it, all ti takes to dethrone PUBG, is to just copy PUBG and make it way more consistent and better in performance and bluehole is toast. Their main idea has seen replication in Fortnite, GTA, and likely many more to come.

So I assure you, performance is high up on their list, novelty of being -first- will only last so long.

 

[BRiT]

Not to mention a lot of developers are locked up by other companies to make even more remakes of remakes.

 

[Billy Idol]

Wtf, I rly hope they are working on it

 

[Scott_Arm]

Wtf, I rly hope they are working on it

I'm 100% sure they're not working on it. I mean, lazy devs right?

Also, while a lot of that vid is hilarious, if you really want to see what the game is like on xbox, hit mixer. It definitely has problems, but not nearly as lol inducing as that vid.

https://mixer.com/browse/all?type=267073-PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

 

[BRiT]

I'm 100% sure they're not working on it. I mean, lazy devs right?

We have it on good authority that they're spending all their time and money on hookers and blow.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Early Access is another way of funding games that likely will not get funded by larger publishers.

After all the scrutiny of Lootboxes and all the big calls for finding other ways to fund games, I didn’t expect people to attack early access.

Problem with Early Access is there's zero guarantees the game will get good or even be finished. IMO, Early Access should be released in playable, quality states, and built on. Each step that offers more content can cost more. Selling a non-functional game is asking consumers to gamble, and with too many failures eventually Early Access will be soured. Then all gaming EAs will be hated.

In PUBG's case, it's big enough to get a publisher I'm sure. They could have rolled out a free demo, got a zillion people playing it, and then got official funding, so the 'fund games that can't get a publisher' hat doesn't fit.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Problem with Early Access is there's zero guarantees the game will get good or even be finished. IMO, Early Access should be released in playable, quality states, and built on. Each step that offers more content can cost more. Selling a non-functional game is asking consumers to gamble, and with too many failures eventually Early Access will be soured. Then all gaming EAs will be hated.

In PUBG's case, it's big enough to get a publisher I'm sure. They could have rolled out a free demo, got a zillion people playing it, and then got official funding, so the 'fund games that can't get a publisher' hat doesn't fit.

I think it's a bit disingenuous to say PUBG is non-functional or non-playable. They've sold 25 million copies of the game and it's the most played game on steam. The Xbox version is undoubtedly going to be a success. It's starting a bit rocky, like it did on PC, and they've admitted it's about 6 months behind the PC version, but if you actually look at general user impressions they are good.

 

[iroboto]

Problem with Early Access is there's zero guarantees the game will get good or even be finished. IMO, Early Access should be released in playable, quality states, and built on. Each step that offers more content can cost more. Selling a non-functional game is asking consumers to gamble, and with too many failures eventually Early Access will be soured. Then all gaming EAs will be hated.

In PUBG's case, it's big enough to get a publisher I'm sure. They could have rolled out a free demo, got a zillion people playing it, and then got official funding, so the 'fund games that can't get a publisher' hat doesn't fit.

I feel like this applies more to Kickstarter games than early access games. Kick starter games may never finish.

Early access games may never make it to 1.0. But There is still a game to be played. Perhaps not the full vision, but they never sold you on the full vision. They sold you on Early access and the price point of early access.

 

[BRiT]

I've seen a huge number of gamers really enjoying their early access ganes including but not limited to the following: Ark Survival Evolved, Astroneer, Pit People, PUBG, Slime Rancher. As mentioned before, a few jump in because of price and a few jump in because the games might be different enough and entertaining enough to want to support them.

But, lets not make this thread into Early Access games. If it pushes that way then we'll have to prune and replant appropriately.

 

[mpg1]

We're only having this discussion because it's an extremely popular game with a lot of attention on it. If it were any other early access game it would be "this is expected".

 

[Scott_Arm]

Here's the framerate test on vanilla Xbox One. Has the same issue where the frame rate sits around 10 fps during parachute and then slowly crawls back up to about 30 fps once you've been on the ground for approximately 30 seconds to a minute. Driving seems to adversely affect frame rate. There are some random dips that don't make a lot of sense, and seem dips that seem to be dependent on what's in the view frustrum. Maybe geometry processing?

I actually think one of the big issues is probably cpu, but maybe also bandwidth. My guess is the game is not good at handling lods or texture streaming. When you're parachuting, there's probably no way for it to nicely stream assets, because a small change of course will put you in a vastly different area on the map. So you end up with it processing more than it should, and then a lot of pop in and issues like that when you land. Would also make sense with fast moving vehicles, because maybe the streaming can't quite keep up with the speed of the vehicle. Disc speed, bandwidth and cpu are all possibilities, depending on how involved the cpu is in terrain rendering.

Definitely not the best version of the game, but it looks playable, and seems to provide the overall experience.

Edit: You can pretty much watch and see the player will look in one direction and the frame rate will drop. Then they'll look another way and it'll hit 30. Then they'll look back and it'll drop. Pretty dependable which views drop the frame rate.

 

[Scott_Arm]

We're only having this discussion because it's an extremely popular game with a lot of attention on it. If it were any other early access game it would be "this is expected".

I think it's also just the difference of console gamers vs pc gamers. PC gamers are a lot more adventurous in terms of alphas, betas, early access, kickstarter. PC gamers hate bugs and issues in full price and retail games, but they're more than willing to deal with issues as long as their aware ahead of time. Console gamers expect their games to be rock solid, and this type of release is not typical on console.

 

[zed]

We have it on good authority that they're spending all their time and money on hookers and blow.

Perhaps theres a bit of that, though I also have it on good authority they've also ordered a few books with titles like
'So you've decided to make a game'
'Become a programmer in 30 days'
'AAA gamemaking for dummies'
Looking at the above video, when was the last time a major game released in such a broken state? I can't think of one
It obviously should of been delayed until it was in a fit state to release, I know they wanted to release before xmas but FFS

but if you actually look at general user impressions they are good.

Dude I think you might wanna recheck the actual steam page, it actually has a mixed rating(*), in case you don't know 'mixed' is worse than average, yes its extremely frequency played

looking at the first page of reviews, eg heres the one from the guy who has the highest number of hours playing the game, 470 hours

76 products in account
3 reviews



Not Recommended
470.0 hrs on record
------------------------While PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS can occasionally be an obscene amount of fun with friends, this game has so many issues that it borders on the unbelievable and in many cases it walks a fine line that teeters on the unacceptable.

470 hours!
you've gotta wonder is it like crack,pokie machines, smoking or something, ppl know its bad but just can't stop.
This is the PC game and its majorly broken, Now according to Scott Arm the console version is 6 months behind that, so I shudder to think what state its in

(*) ranked 11,827 of 17,587 games

 

[Scott_Arm]

@zed The guy has played 470 hours and says it's a lot of fun with friends ... but doesn't recommend? Makes zero sense.

I'm not sure if I like the game yet or not. I've spent about an hour with it. It's definitely one of the most suspenseful games I've played. I think it's really carried by the game mode, and it will easily be surpassed by a more technically competent developer.

Edit: Oh, and in my brief playtime I quickly quickly quickly fully disabled the controller deadzone and pushed up all of the sensitivity sliders, because the default setting is not great. Thanks for the help on that, Coalition.

 

[DrJay24]

Perhaps theres a bit of that, though I also have it on good authority they've also ordered a few books with titles like
'So you've decided to make a game'
'Become a programmer in 30 days'
'AAA gamemaking for dummies'

Don't forget 'Unity for Dummies'.

 

[Malo]

Don't forget 'Unity for Dummies'.

I'm pretty sure that has to exist considering all the Unity shovelware released to Steam.

 

[dobwal]

So drops to 10-20 fps in a competitive shooter is OK in 2017? The game is a muddy mess. They have sold millions of copies of "early access" copies but can't pay someone to port the game to a functional engine? Meanwhile Fortnite is 60fps on the X?

Obviously it is for the millions that have purchased the game on the pc and consoles despite it's shortcomings.

It's not like anyone is being tricked by marketing tactics. The game seemed to have moved a ton even with videos everywhere showing it's less than stellar state.