Why even bother with the PTB, just make it live.
We all know that no amount of feedback will change anything on PTB.
The Devs clearly think Ruin is in a good place, they think they have somehow made Dr more fun to play as or against, just freaking make it go live so we don’t lose part of our playerbase testing this stupid thjng.
Tagged:
Trusted
Comments
But if it was live already they'd have to wait til next patch to nerf it.
Didnt they already say they are looking to reduce or remove the cooldown from the doctor after his blast?
Can we not come to conclusions not even a day after PTB is released? They said the Ruin was fine and not gonna have a change a few hours after PTB was live, so they were mostly based on their internal testing and the complaints in the forums was something that always happened after meta perks like DS had gotten nerfed anyways.
Now that they saw the actual outrage, when the PTB shows how the killer performance actually is with the Ruin changes, they can balance it accordingly. If its something different than the tests they have done, and it will most likely be, they will likely do something about it.
If the Ruin changes don’t go live exactly like this I’ll buy you a DLC or cosmetic of your choice and you can legit DM if they do
Ahaha, thanks mate but keep it.
You have a point, BHVR does have the track record of not fixing problems before updates go live. But I am still expecting them to make changes with all thats happening.
I try to be positive and give benefit of the doubt, but I feel and I may be wrong, but I feel like they worked on this so long they’re set on it
They have to make sure survivors are having fun. During the last PTB, survivors screamed "ONI NOT FUN!" BHVR was quick to respond. By quick, I mean 10 days after he went live.
He could literally 180 with his one shot ability making him nearly uncounterable if he was somewhat experienced. Not changed correctly at the launch but its in a really good spot now with the PTB, so not a good example.
Over a month of him being a Dollar General Hillbilly. It's a great example.
First of all, I covered that in my post. Secondly your point was that the change was because survivors "not having fun". If you are really defeding the broken version in the PTB right now, you are too biased to even have an argument with.
This is the thing, they see new bugs and they still make it to live. Heck, they haven't even fixed half of the current bugs.
But man, did you see all those cosmetics!!!
Well it's not the Public Feedback Beta, it's the Public Test Beta.
If they are just going to go off their own tests why have a ptb at all
I understand why it might feel like that, but that's cognitive bias talking, plain and simple.
Here's a list of things that the devs changed after the last PTB, largely based on player feedback:
Here's a list of things that were changed from the PTB before that (again, largely based on player feedback):
Here's a list of changes that were made on the PTB before that:
Obviously, there are a lot of good reasons to bother with the PTB. Feedback does change things. Just because they don't make every single change that is suggested by the players, that doesn't mean that they don't listen to player feedback or make adjustments on that basis between PTB and live. Not to mention, the PTB had been live for only a few hours when they announced that they were going to be changing the Doctor's Shock Therapy cooldown, so that's already proof that they're listening to player feedback this time around as well.
Fibjean I think that almost(If not out right) proves why people are pissed right now about the PTB:
The devs have PROVED they are willing to listen in the past but on ruin they are doing the metaphorical equivalent of plugging their ears while saying "Lalala I can't hear you" to any and all criticism of the ruin changes.
Which is both jarring and demeaning to players who are genuinely trying to give constructive feedback.
And of course, you are the beacon of impartiality. No, you didn't not cover it in your post. When it was clear the devs need to fix him, they decided to take a pro-survivor stance and nerf him into oblivion instead of a pro-killer stance of leaving him as is. The devs top priority is the fun of the survivors. If you disagree with that, you are not paying attention.
I would love to make a proper rebuttal, because there's a lot wrong with your argument, but you've already claimed that your own speculation is "fact" ("'changes to Ruin are coming regardless of player feedback.' this is a fact"), and indicated several times ("this is Trusted figurehead bias talking", "I understand you give biased responses") that you believe my arguments to be irrevocably biased, on top of suggesting that I'm dishonest and incapable of looking at a situation objectively.
In other words, my opponent is someone who is apparently unable to tell the difference between theories and facts, is convinced that their own opinion is the latter, and has already expressed an unwillingness to take anything I say in good faith. There is absolutely nothing constructive to be gained from arguing with someone like that. So I'm not going to.
The changes were announced yesterday. The PTB has been going on for barely 12 hours. I get that it's disheartening not to see the devs saying things like "yes we agree there are issues and we're going to change them" right away, but if they're following their usual pattern, that's because they're giving it some breathing room and waiting to see if people still have the same complaints once they've had a bit more time to test and get used to the changes.
They've proved in the past that they're willing to listen, as you say, even though at the time, the people giving the feedback felt exactly the same way as you do now. We can say from past experience that they probably are listening even if they're not responding very encouragingly. So let's give them a bit more than 24 hours of leeway and see if they'll be willing to do something this time.
I'd normally would if they weren't already on the forums effectively saying: Its going though anyways so stop complaining.
I would have given them the credit of the doubt if they hadn't confirmed they don't care about the feed back in the PTB on ruin to the point(As far as I know) they didn't even bother putting feed back on the changes on the PTB survey despite it being a rework to one of the most used perks in the game.
If you want to interpret that from what was said I can't really stop you, but all they've actually said is they were happy with how the perk ran during their internal testing. It's true that the Ruin changes weren't asked about in the survey, and honestly I don't know why that is, but there is still the feedback subforum.
Yes, it is entirely possible that they're going to push the changes through regardless of what the players say. But too many people are treating that like it's already confirmed and not just a possibility. The fact is, we don't know what they're going to do until they've done it. In the meantime, if we want change to happen, all we can do is use the avenues available to us, like the feedback subforum, to make our opinions heard.
Here is the problem, they let MoM go live and yes it was nerfed it still was delayed. Ruin isn't a nerf, it's a whole new perk. Do you really think BHVR will revert it? There isn't even a section for ruin feedback on the survey so I think they decision is set in stone.
Ruin wasn’t asked about in the survey, I don’t know why that is.
Are you really that naive? Like others have said to reinforce the topic title, the Ruin decision is set in stone. Killers could literally get zero kills in every single PTB game for the next week and it would still go live.
That's right, a person doesn't need high intelligence to be considered for the Trusted tag, but I can't tell you what the requirements actually are, or people would misuse that information.
I didn't say at all that you can't give feedback, that's just you misinterpreting my words.
Testing is it's primary function, and while they'll always listen to the feedback, it's primary purpose is to make sure it works so it can launch in a better state.
Feedback can then also be used to alter the content, or they can choose not to if they believe that's better, which is how it's not what it's made for.
I hope that cleared it up for you. 😊
I stand by what I said. I don't know why that is, and neither does anyone else except for the developers themselves. We can speculate, of course, and many people have, but I don't think speculation is going to get us anywhere constructive, so I prefer to avoid it.
The fact is, for whatever reason, it unfortunately wasn't mentioned in the survey, so we can either complain about that, assume it means the devs don't care and just give up, or we can give constructive feedback through the channels that remain to us, such as the feedback subforum.
It's not ideal, I agree, but I actually want changes to be made, so I know which option I'm going to pick.
Thats not a list of things changed based on feedback, I am sorry. As an example, the blink recharge add-ons were not nerfed because of player feedback. Litterally no one asked for it.
I'll leave it up for you to theorize, still can't give you more hints on how to gain the tag.
I was elaborate enough, if I meant it wasn't at all for feedback, I would've said so.
Yes, it was.
I don't think I need to repeat myself, you can re-read the comment.
I don't mind one bit to come back and comment more to help others understand. 😊
Hence why I said "largely based on player feedback". Some changes are ones the devs decide to make on their own. In that same patch, though, the Styptic, Syringe, audio and Torn Bookmark changes were all based on player feedback from the PTB. The only changes that probably weren't are the recharge add-on changes, and what was essentially a bug fix. All the major changes were feedback-based, though, and mostly killer feedback at that.
Because they need a thin veil of lies that they are listening to their community so they can come off as.
"Well we tested it in PTB and a buncha people said they liked it, so thats good enough for us."
Despite what the apparent at large community consensus is.
How do you know nothing will change? I dislike the changes made to ruin but it still can be changed.
I could say to test it out and find bugs to fix before it goes live.
But
When has that ever happen?
I don’t expect them to completely pull the idea since it can work but I’d like some number tweaks. I don’t want ruin changed but the idea can work (I think it’ll need buffs though), I don’t play doc so I won’t speak about him, I do however use ruin and would like the numbers tweaked.
Did any of the feedback change what happened to nurse? There was a full subforum of it, instead you got one liners about how good mindgame potential is when she turns into a 115ms killer.
Was any of it regarded? Oh yes, they removed the permanent peeeb each time you would gain a blink back, much wow.
Did you read the dev blog? Go figure why people are pissed. They do not even understand why ruin was used by 45% of the playerbase. Lets talk about the situation when ruin makes it to late game lol. Name 3 benefits about the new ruin and it is completely about how the new ruin benefits survivors.
When they post stuff like that, it just shows.
I read the blog. I understand why people are pissed. I was personally disappointed in both it and the Ruin changes, which in my opinion don't benefit either killers or survivors (but that's another discussion).
I'll say it one last time, because honestly I'm getting tired of repeating myself on this topic: I get why people are pissed. I do. If you don't want to leave feedback, if you think it won't matter, that is entirely up to you. I disagree, so I'm going to give feedback, even if it doesn't get taken on board, because if no one says anything then it definitely won't. No one is forcing you to leave feedback if you think it's pointless, but if you have a problem with the way the devs are communicating, there's no point taking it up with me.
You do see in which state the forum is since the announcement, how much more feedback do they need?
Fair enough, i figured as much anyway, but just wanted to make sure.
And you did, and i elaborated.
Guess we'll always disagree on this, so i'm putting it to rest before it escalates.
Okay, i figured it was easy to understand since explaining it would be repeating something i mentioned before, but here goes: It's primary function is to test.
Feedback is an important aspect, but it's not a primary function.
You know, like how videogames in general have the primary function to entertain, and competition within those games is an important aspect, but not the primary function.
That's how "it's not what it's made for", if it was just pure feedback, there'd be no reason to call it Public Test Build.
Hopefully it's clear to you now. 😊