Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60

Thread: Any recent news on Chests?

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Thrawn View Post
    It's not intended for you to collect a full set before the next set is released. Cards would have almost no value if your average player had a full set, or even close to it, of every set before the next one was released.
    Right, but who wants to be an average player?!
    /stɹeɪlʌɪt/
    Grand Cultist of Insane Troll Superstition

  2. #22
    Yeah I mean I can't see many reasons to hold back. If the feature was going to be in the bigger patch, you already accounted for the Dev Time for it, so you aren't adding much more but compiling that feature into a patch. Honestly, I think it would do them good to have some features released in smaller patches and then big things like SETS or PvE Content in larger patches that take more time.

    You can look at the failure to do this from the game Wildstar. It was fun, sure, but they had major bugs that prevented daily content to be done and a grouping issue that didn't allow you to join groups because the game thought you were already in one. Those bugs lasted months and because they held off on smaller patches trying to make pull together a lot of new features and bugs, they lost almost their entire player base from launch. I don't know the numbers, but it was incredible how fast the logins declined. The more negative views about a game (bugs / basic features missing) and how long they persist, eventually cause people to resent the game.

    So there is a lesson to be learned about how much people are willing to wait for content, features, and bug fixes. The constant release of small patches keeps people at ease that the game is continually at work, and that their voices are being heard. I am a programmer, but for the Development Cycle, I can't speak to whether or not it's easier/better for HexEnt to adjust to a more satisfying schedule. They should be considering what might happen if they take too little action though. (Which I think they realize since they gave the extra 6 months draft to some backers, not that that helps everyone)


    You could also look at a company that does this pretty well, Blizzard. Granted, they have an insanely large development staff, that they can split up into teams, but they make larger content patches that come out every 3-4 months (Like Sets) and then features and major bug fixes come out on the week that they are tested and ready. They don't hold back the Quality of Life changes WHICH is really the parts that keep people playing.

    IE: Right now, I think it's way too troublesome to sell extra cards especially when I have a lot of one card.
    Adding Batch listings, or the ability to list up to 4 together would be really useful and I might spend more time enjoying posting things on the auction house. Which then lends me to think much more positively about the game and that my time in it isn't being wasted, which might get me to farm more cards playing even just the Arena when right now it's like beating my head against a wall. As much as I love to play Hex, Arena has just gotten stale from running through it 100s of times.


    And as far as Cory hoping things to be done in a certain time. Trying to figure out when a feature is going to be finished, even in games that aren't trying to do something new, like shooters, it is known in the professional world as one of the hardest things to do. There are people specifically hired to do this job and a lot of times they are wrong by a 1.5 margin. So if something should 'hopefully' take 1 week to get done, a lot of times it may take 1 and a half weeks, and so on. There is a reason that every major company that makes a game has at some point pushed back a release date.
    KickSTARTER
    Grand King

    Hex IGN: Ares

  3. #23
    Blizzard also has tens of millions of dollars to throw around on their budgets, and a staff roughly 10x larger than CZE's. In addition, they don't release their products into what they call "beta" until they're essentially done bar polish and balancing. Hex was released to the public a good 2 years earlier than a Blizzard product ever would have been (estimate, as a staff Blizzard's size likely could have programmed the same game in less time if they were so inclined). On the whole, it's not really a valid comparison.
    --ossuary

    "Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none."
    - Shakespeare, All's Well That Ends Well

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by ossuary View Post
    Blizzard also has tens of millions of dollars to throw around on their budgets, and a staff roughly 10x larger than CZE's. In addition, they don't release their products into what they call "beta" until they're essentially done bar polish and balancing. Hex was released to the public a good 2 years earlier than a Blizzard product ever would have been (estimate, as a staff Blizzard's size likely could have programmed the same game in less time if they were so inclined). On the whole, it's not really a valid comparison.
    Didn't I say that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blare731 View Post
    Granted, they have an insanely large development staff...
    Yes, I know HexEnt is no where near the size of Blizzard and I said that. I think it's pretty odd that you picked out that part, because it was obvious and I had already stated it trying to make sure I was being clear. Then you chose to disregard the fact that it still has meaning. You just argued something I agreed with, and then at the end called the point invalid. When you MISSED the point of why I was talking about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blare731 View Post
    You could also look at a company that does this pretty well, Blizzard.
    The point wasn't to compare HexEnt development team size to Blizzard, the point was to say that there are companies who do release smaller patches well, and it benefits those games. I don't think anyone can really sit here and tell me that people don't enjoy playing Blizzard games. And I'm not saying it's all due to constant patches but I would suspect a healthy amount is. Blizzard was just the first game that I thought of as well.



    Sorry for singling you out and being a bit passive aggressive, but it peeves me that you chose to disregard the entire argument in the process because you only found a complaint with that part. It also stems from people who will find a spelling mistake or grammatical error and then focus on that as well.

    I have to say, usually I side with a lot of things you say on these forums Oss, but I think it was a bit naive or a bit of stubbornness to not consider the rest of my post, even if it was a poor example.
    KickSTARTER
    Grand King

    Hex IGN: Ares

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by ossuary View Post
    Blizzard also has tens of millions of dollars to throw around on their budgets, and a staff roughly 10x larger than CZE's.
    Blizzard has Billions and likely a couple hundred times the amount of employees to make your point even more valid

  6. #26
    To be fair, Hearthstone had a very small team of 15 developers. Less than HEX. A lot of the budget for the game around the first year was put into marketing I bet.

    http://hydra-media.cursecdn.com/hear...eet_Team_5.jpg
    Last edited by Axle; 05-06-2015 at 05:21 PM.

  7. #27
    Master of Gifs
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Zophiria
    Posts
    2,728
    If anyone is following the current Shadowrun Chronicles post-launch debacle you'll see what happens when devs push out lots of small bug fixes in a short period of time with rushed QA testing. They're trying very hard but they've made some very clear mistakes with their approach that they are currently regretting and trying to make up for. Their team is probably around the same size as Hex's, and I'm glad that the Hex devs have avoided this pitfall and are taking a much better approach to testing and bug fixes.

    Edit: To clarify, I know this is kind of an apples/oranges comparison, but I just wanted to add this as an example to provide some perspective of potential problems that can come up with smaller patches and the rushed QA testing that is required due to the increased frequency of said patches.
    Last edited by Zophie; 05-06-2015 at 05:29 PM.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by ossuary View Post
    On the whole, it's not really a valid comparison.
    The main competitor of HEX is HS, which is a Blizzard game. Thus the comparison is valid by default. It may not be fair but it certainly is valid. Or maybe you are under the impression that the average gamer gives a dime about a company's size/budget? They don't! All they care about is the state of the games they play. HEXent really need to step up their game ASAP if they want HEX to be as big as we all want it to be.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Zophie View Post
    If anyone is following the current Shadowrun Chronicles post-launch debacle you'll see what happens when devs push out lots of small bug fixes in a short period of time with rushed QA testing. They're trying very hard but they've made some very clear mistakes with their approach that they are currently regretting and trying to make up for. Their team is probably around the same size as Hex's, and I'm glad that the Hex devs have avoided this pitfall and are taking a much better approach to testing and bug fixes.

    Hmm, although I see your point. When I say frequent patches that have small content, I don't mean untested. I mean test the same amount as if it were going to be in one large patch, and then release it when it's ready. Not before, but as it is ready. Will new features have bugs? Of course they will! Those same bugs would be present in the larger patches as well. Honestly, tell someone to code a feature and it will more than likely have bugs. Tell that same person to code three, four, five features at the same time to have them ready on a particular patch day. You are just increasing the odds of making a mistake.


    Now, like Ossuary said previously, an approach like this would likely increase development times as a whole. Because you are adding the testing and iteration step multiple times for each feature instead of all at once. BUT individually, and as a community, we will see features more frequently. Which is key to making sure the player base as a whole stays interested and happy. =]
    KickSTARTER
    Grand King

    Hex IGN: Ares

  10. #30
    There are several different methodologies when developing software, they all have pros and cons. But one thing is universally true, switching between them mid project is a nightmare. This is how they're developing the game, and it is how they should continue developing the game until a major milestone is reached. There are way too many moving parts at this moment to change gears.
    ----
    http://i.imgur.com/I1MZpF8.png
    HexEnt is too long to type, They're HXE now.
    I am currently trading my unused GK code for a new Tesla Model S P85D
    Feel free to contact me for where you can have it shipped.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •