So the console users were indeed guinea pigs...

[inertSpark]

Not taking anyone's side here but I think what people are trying to understand is how a second iteration of game can get quite a few things wrong when the first one was a success in most of those very areas.

Like someone had mentioned here, BA tried to appease everyone and in doing so overdid a lot of the stuff and dug themselves a hole. While BA's intention was certainly admirable and something that is praiseworthy, perhaps they should have kept the Women's aspect of the game and the Stadium Creator for future iterations. An in-dept Career mode (which it already is now) and maybe a couple of cosmetic stuff was worthy enough of a new iteration of the game.

But you're right. There is no doubt in my mind that everything's gonna be sorted out and DBC17 will become the new DBC14 in time.

I guess, but they have to push the envelope to keep relevant. I mean people are downvoting Football Manager right now because it's "just like last year's game", despite still being technically a good game. There's always a danger that things might not work as intended when you add new features, and sometimes in ways not envisaged. That's game development for you. People will complain if you add features, some will complain if you take them away, and others will complain if you don't do anything.

 

[Chief]

PS: For those above, SteamSpy includes, but "guesses", revenue/non-revenue test, and in DBC14's case, Retail, and can be way out on smaller numbers for games like DBC/17.

In DBC's case though, as the retail game has to be activated through Steam anyway, wouldn't that be taken into account?

 

[Deleted member 149013]

I prefer:

PS: For those above, SteamSpy includes, but "guesses", revenue/non-revenue test, and in DBC14's case, Retail, and can be way out on smaller numbers for games like DBC/17.

Well there’s a nice memory Ross.

I prefer…

 

[Deleted member 9102]

I guess, but they have to push the envelope to keep relevant. I mean people are downvoting Football Manager right now because it's "just like last year's game", despite still being technically a good game. There's always a danger that things might not work as intended when you add new features, and sometimes in ways not envisaged. That's game development for you. People will complain if you add features, some will complain if you take them away, and others will complain if you don't do anything.

It's not that simple with FM... Lots of the negative reviews for it especially initially were from Chinese players angry at not having the game translated to their language, this is probably the cause of the pitiful 31% overall... But if you actually read many of the negative English reviews then there is much more to it than simply "it's the same as last year" although that is one of the recurring themes.

It's the same as previous years in the wrong ways (bugs left untouched, dumb game mechanics still in place), the new stuff is totally superficial or downright terrible ("social media" implementation is pointless, adds nothing of value) and the match engine is incredibly frustrating and IMO worse than the likes of CM4, FM07/08 etc...

I don't think people would have such a big issue with games staying mostly the same with only incremental improvements, as long as the fundamentals stay solid and the changes that are made are well thought out and well executed...

 

[BigAntStudios]

In DBC's case though, as the retail game has to be activated through Steam anyway, wouldn't that be taken into account?

No sure how they work things out, I'm just looking at how high their error% is and am attributing it to Retail/Beta codes. The fact that the error% is so high lead to me to believe that they are most likely scraping leaderboards or something else, like vgchartz (worst data ever!) do.

 

[Chief]

No sure how they work things out, I'm just looking at how high their error% is and am attributing it to Retail/Beta codes. The fact that the error% is so high lead to me to believe that they are most likely scraping leaderboards or something else, like vgchartz (worst data ever!) do.

They actually tell you pretty much exactly how they work it out here: About - SteamSpy - All the data and stats about Steam games

And admit that it's basically guess work.

I use campartive figures where available: Steamcharts tell you how many people were playing the game at any given time, and an average across all players. The DBC17 numbers are very slightly behind the DBC14 numbers at this stage, so I make the assumption that it's either slightly behind or probably roughly equivalent to those numbers.

I only know of 5 beta codes given out because of their reviews on Steam. Otherwise they are impossible to track.

 

[karolkarol]

It's not that simple with FM... Lots of the negative reviews for it especially initially were from Chinese players angry at not having the game translated to their language, this is probably the cause of the pitiful 31% overall... But if you actually read many of the negative English reviews then there is much more to it than simply "it's the same as last year" although that is one of the recurring themes.

It's the same as previous years in the wrong ways (bugs left untouched, dumb game mechanics still in place), the new stuff is totally superficial or downright terrible ("social media" implementation is pointless, adds nothing of value) and the match engine is incredibly frustrating and IMO worse than the likes of CM4, FM07/08 etc...

I don't think people would have such a big issue with games staying mostly the same with only incremental improvements, as long as the fundamentals stay solid and the changes that are made are well thought out and well executed...

The last few FM iterations before they introduced the 3d match engine were the pinnacle for that series. It's been going downhill with superficial crap bolted on ever since.

 

[Acid Burn]

I'm sure @BigAntStudios would love nothing more than to push out patch after patch every week, however I happen to know that it costs developers at least $40,000 to even get a patch through the approval process, and that's just for Playstation Network alone!. Ross will know the exact amount, but I'm certain Sony don't allow him to discuss the approval process with any great clarity.

<a href="Let it rain! | Page 11 - Don Bradman Cricket 17 Forum on PlanetCricket Forums">Let it rain!</a>

Bearing in mind that they are committed to fix the long list of irritations , Its probably man power and in house Costs (which as a Management decision should be waived to "fix" the mistakes) thats making it take so long.

But a little info , here and there of what has so far been fixed would help keep everyones hopes up at least.

Currently the lights are off , and we dont know when we are going to hear the keys in the lock ...

 

[Jerm]

<a href="Let it rain! | Page 11 - Don Bradman Cricket 17 Forum on PlanetCricket Forums">Let it rain!</a>

Bearing in mind that they are committed to fix the long list of irritations , Its probably man power and in house Costs (which as a Management decision should be waived to "fix" the mistakes) thats making it take so long.

But a little info , here and there of what has so far been fixed would help keep everyones hopes up at least.

Currently the lights are off , and we dont know when we are going to hear the keys in the lock ...

LOL doesn't matter, just wait we know its coming, and when it comes woohoo bog surprise , at this point I want the new ps4 system update NOW! I need more harddrive space and the 4.5 update allows external harddrives...man I cannot wait!

 

[asprin]

Currently the lights are off , and we dont know when we are going to hear the keys in the lock ...

I like this analogy. Very well thought.

 

[Seriously]

<a href="Let it rain! | Page 11 - Don Bradman Cricket 17 Forum on PlanetCricket Forums">Let it rain!</a>

Bearing in mind that they are committed to fix the long list of irritations , Its probably man power and in house Costs (which as a Management decision should be waived to "fix" the mistakes) thats making it take so long.

But a little info , here and there of what has so far been fixed would help keep everyones hopes up at least.

Currently the lights are off , and we dont know when we are going to hear the keys in the lock ...

sorry but this game should not have been released and honestly tested better
Beta should have run and they should have gone on the feedback from users and from there fix the game

But no, this did not happen and we sit with a game that has more bugs than hookers at a STD convention

i love sports games but this game went bad at a whole new level
from

both batsman at non strikers end while bowler is bowling
to 2 fine legs
or 2 mid ons

to field settings that can be changed if you are lucky enough and it accepts it after the 10th try
only to not be able to change it again
to batsman playing reverse sweep when you try and cut a ball

the list goes on

 

[Nathaus]

I disagree. If releasing before the holidays amid the hype of summer cricket meant more sales, with the knowledge that the game breaking bugs could be fixed in a relatively short time frame and an inflated budget due to better sales meaning better post sale support then I think it's short term pain for long term gain.

Remember, this isn't an annual franchise and will be the only cricket game we get for the next 2 or 3 years. We'll be playing this long in to the future so having a month or 2 of 'unplayable' deliveries means we have 2 or 3 years on a flat track, we're all better off. I'd say we've seen off the new ball now and it's time to start enjoying our cricket again.

I purchased after patch 3 and I have had the game crash once. There are a few annoyances like running between the wickets, but it's more than manageable and is more than forgiven when I bowl an over of seem all in the same spot, just short of a length then pitch an in-swinger up to catch a plumb LBW.