Paradox had 18 QA peeps playing this for weeks?

[IndiraLightfoot]

March 19, Eurogamer:

Fredrik Wester, Paradox: "Two or three years ago we had to publish games we couldn't really stand behind and that damaged our reputation, because we needed the cashflow," Wester added. "Now we're in a totally different position.

"If we don't think Pillars of Eternity is up to standard, we're going to tell these guys. And we're opinionated people, we're going to come back with tons of opinions. We have a QA team of eighteen people who're going to play the game for weeks and weeks and give their feedback."

 

This is a bit worrisome. Did Paradox test this beta build, this vertical slice for weeks and weeks with 18 professional game testers, and it's now in the state it's in? After all their honest feedback and tough love, it plays like this?

 

One thing, they didn't test very well, as we can see in most of the backer beta forum posts, and that's combat. Obviously, Paradox has nothing to do with the IE games, the NWN2 games, or even any spiritually related games.

 

I have played a few of their games, Europa Universalis IV and Crusader Kings 2, for instance, and they are pretty great in all respects but two: combat and esoteric systems. In fact, they excel in creating black boxes, with millions of interlocked gear inside, which spit out cool results, generating very varied and fun results.

And what do you know? This is exactly how the combat and the system for PoE feel right now.

 

In all honesty, this thread is done tongue in cheek, but I'm still concerned that these 18 testers really seem to have so little grasp of the CRPG genre, and especially how to make combat clear, correctly paced, varied and party-based-oriented/friendly.

 

18 select testers out of these forums would have done a better job, of that I am certain.

 

Discuss!

Edited September 6, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Sensuki]

I think the Paradox testers are testing localization and possibly other sections of the game - such as all of the areas not in the Backer Beta. Also level ranges 8-12.

 

The Backer Beta testing is up to us. It is up to us to find the issues with these areas, help squash bugs and give our input on design and mechanics.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Sensuki

[Labadal]

I am not defending Pillars of Eternity but in general, many buggy and unbalanced games have been released before. The Elder Scrolls games on consoles. Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas on consoles.

 

I have seen many games that have had a lot of QA testers but when the game releases, you would think that it was a lie.

 

For Pillars of Eternity, you would at least have guessed that they would have noted the most glaring bugs that were in the backer beta v257.

[Wintersong]

I hope that they are testing the game and not this beta.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Alright. I had no idea that they didn't test this vertical slice, which they still have demonstrated at game shows and all. So, just localization and other areas? You'd think they would have tested the very part that people got to test in those shows, but now I stand corrected. However, I could have sworn I saw Adler mentioning that most known issues were picked up by the Paradox QA (and their own, of course.)

[Sensuki]

Some of the bugs from v257 bb were not bugs that were present in the E3 version. They crept into the build leading up to Gamescom and Obsidian was not able to fix them in time. It was just bad luck.

[Justinian]

I think the QA team they're talking about would come in either now or later as the game wraps up. Not sure if they had much if any involvement with QA on the backer beta.

[IndiraLightfoot]

IDG.SE, March 19, Wester:

"Vi är bra på spel som riktar sig till en nördpublik, men har saknat just rollspel."

"Dessutom har Obsidian massa fans bland våra anställda. Jag har räknat till minst åtta på Paradox som var med och kickstartade Pillars of Eternity långt innan vi som bolag började snacka med dem. Och själv var jag en aning starstruck när jag snackade med Obsidians legendariska speldesigner Chris Avellone under förhandlingarna."

 

Translation into English:

"We're good at nerdy games, but we haven't had any RPG." 

"We have lots of fans of Obsidian among our employees. At least eight people at Paradox helped kickstart PoE. I was star-struck when I met the game dev Chris Avellone during the negotiations."

 

This is good news, at least some of their staff ought to know CRPGs, after all.

[Infinitron]

It's not a question of finding the bugs. It's a question of Obsidian getting around to fixing them.

 

You think they didn't know about most of the problems in the initial beta release already?

Edited September 6, 2014 by Infinitron

[Azrael Ultima]

Bugs don't mysteriously disappear when noticed, contrary to popular opinion.

 

And the goal should be to get the final game bug free, not individual beta builds.

[Sensuki]

I'm more concerned about micro-features and design rather than bugs.

[Karkarov]

I'm more concerned about micro-features and design rather than bugs.

That's fair but like I said elsewhere there is no point in fine tuning gameplay and mechanics when there is a big ass bug sitting on it that will crap out both regardless of how well tuned they are.  You have to fix what is broken before you start trying to improve what isn't.

[Bester]

March 19, Eurogamer:

Fredrik Wester, Paradox: "Two or three years ago we had to publish games we couldn't really stand behind and that damaged our reputation, because we needed the cashflow," Wester added. "Now we're in a totally different position.

"If we don't think Pillars of Eternity is up to standard, we're going to tell these guys. And we're opinionated people, we're going to come back with tons of opinions. We have a QA team of eighteen people who're going to play the game for weeks and weeks and give their feedback."

 

This is a bit worrisome. Did Paradox test this beta build, this vertical slice for weeks and weeks with 18 professional game testers, and it's now in the state it's in? After all their honest feedback and tough love, it plays like this?

 

One thing, they didn't test very well, as we can see in most of the backer beta forum posts, and that's combat. Obviously, Paradox has nothing to do with the IE games, the NWN2 games, or even any spiritually related games.

 

I have played a few of their games, Europa Universalis IV and Crusader Kings 2, for instance, and they are pretty great in all respects but two: combat and esoteric systems. In fact, they excel in creating black boxes, with millions of interlocked gear inside, which spit out cool results, generating very varied and fun results.

And what do you know? This is exactly how the combat and the system for PoE feel right now.

 

In all honesty, this thread is done tongue in cheek, but I'm still concerned that these 18 testers really seem to have so little grasp of the CRPG genre, and especially how to make combat clear, correctly paced, varied and party-based-oriented/friendly.

 

18 select testers out of these forums would have done a better job, of that I am certain.

 

Discuss!

 

What the hell??? Paradox, shut your mouth pls, ok? You're just a distributor, you've got nothing to do with this game and your opinions - you can just shove them.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Bester

[Sensuki]

That's fair but like I said elsewhere there is no point in fine tuning gameplay and mechanics when there is a big ass bug sitting on it that will crap out both regardless of how well tuned they are.  You have to fix what is broken before you start trying to improve what isn't.

My point was more I am not overly concerned about the product final state bug wise. I'm more concerned about the final state design and mechanics wise.

They could fix every bug in the game and combat and exploration would still not be fun at this point.

[Sloul]

Basically they released Sword of the star II: ''Two or three years ago we had to publish games we couldn't really stand behind and that damaged our reputation, ''

And now, they are just cautious, they don't want to release a product which sucks.

 

1/. This is good that they are cautious

2/. This is good that they are not willing to distribute a product which sucks

 

 

Mostly, I think Paradox will just check if the game is not too buggy and does not present too many broken features. The rest is up to Obsidian.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Sloul

[Seari]

Hopefully Paradox encourages them to postpone the release date, once they see all the problems. Or maybe Obsidian will blow our minds and just fix everything before release date. Doubt it.

[Infinitron]

They can "encourage" them with some free money.

[forgottenlor]

They can "encourage" them with some free money.

If Obsidian wants to make a good product, they will fix bugs and what not regardless of when the game is released. Releasing a game too full of design

flaws and bugs just leads to bad reviews and less sales. It will also make future kickstarters more difficult. Take Realms of Arkana:Blades of Destiny. The developers patched the game continuously almost 8 months after release, admitted having been forced to release before they wanted to by the publisher. The result were terrible reviews and refunds on Steam. How did this serve them? I remember when Vampire:Bloodlines was released. It was considered a debacle. The reviews were utterly damning. Today it is considered a classic and one of the best RPGs of all time. Noone remembers now that the game was more or less released unfinished, Troika shortly afterwards went under, and that it was Troika's poorest selling game.

[Tartantyco]

Hopefully Paradox encourages them to postpone the release date, once they see all the problems. Or maybe Obsidian will blow our minds and just fix everything before release date. Doubt it.

 

Just because you think the game has a lot of problems, doesn't mean those problems actually exist. You may disagree with the design, but that does not make the design bad. I can't really think of much that isn't fixed through the balancing and bug fixing process that is scheduled to take place, and is taking place, right now.

[Elerond]

Hopefully Paradox encourages them to postpone the release date, once they see all the problems. Or maybe Obsidian will blow our minds and just fix everything before release date. Doubt it.

 

If Paradox has any sort of sense they don't do such things before Obsidian deliveries them release candidate version of the game and even then only if that version has some serious problems that can't be solved during period that game is in gold, because otherwise such suggestion only works to lower morale of developing team and lessen change that game will be finished on the time. 

 

And Obsidian has plenty of time to fix the bugs and tune balance, I would predict that only major changes in game system or added features/content would cause them need more time in such extent that they would need postpone release date from what they have currently announced.

[Sensuki]

I can't really think of much that isn't fixed through the balancing and bug fixing process that is scheduled to take place, and is taking place, right now.

Probably because it appears you don't care whether the combat feels like an IE game or not.

[Tartantyco]

 

I can't really think of much that isn't fixed through the balancing and bug fixing process that is scheduled to take place, and is taking place, right now.

Probably because it appears you don't care whether the combat feels like an IE game or not.

 

Tell me what these problems are that aren't fixed through balancing, bug fixing, or the implementation of pending features such as feedback.

[Sarex]

@Sensuki he is just baiting you, there is no point in talking with him.

[Sensuki]

I think there's quite a few design issues at the moment:

 

Attribute system - Perception and Resolve are pretty much completely useless. This will not be fixed by making Interrupts much longer either, because that would just make the game feel stupid. MOBA style 1-1.5 sec stuns don't fit this kind of game. I have a solution for this though, coming in a thread near you

 

Attribute point assignment - Culture and Racial bonuses mean close to nothing, unless you want to max a stat. Their only benefit is you can potentially get something up to 20-21, however in all of the IE games, racial bonuses from attributes meant a bit more. They were worth more than a "point" in point buy - currently like in the skill system, the class starting bonuses are huge, because they give you benefits from between 1-4 points each in the system (I'm talking about triangular points, not actual skill points).

 

Exploration Feel - Smaller maps combined with larger sized characters and creatures and a fast movement speed combined with higher density in the Wilderness areas ruins the feeling of Wilderness exploration.

 

UI Elements - some of the UI elements are suboptimal and need a slight redesign - Inventory for instance, it's very obtuse moving items around on characters, it's actually worse than the IE games, when it was an attempt to be an improvement.

 

Combat Feel - Combat feels way off at the moment, due a variety of factors. Pure balance, bug fixing and added features won't solve it, it will require some design tweaks/alterations possibly.

 

Shopping - Currently shopping feels more obtuse than the IE games, the UI and system for that might need a bit of a tweak.

 

Class Flexibility - Improvements need to be made so that some classes feel more interesting/flexible. Some classes are pidgeonholed into one build/repetitive actions

 

Advancement - Currently Character Advancement is underwhelming. It's better than BG1 and IWD1, but it's not really better than IWD2 (or BG2 at higher levels)

 

Off the top of my head that's all I can think of but I have way more design related stuff in my notes (cbf looking through), minus the issue with armor which you don't seem to think is a problem, and it may not be if encounter design makes up for it.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Sensuki

[IndiraLightfoot]

I think the QA team they're talking about would come in either now or later as the game wraps up. Not sure if they had much if any involvement with QA on the backer beta.

This would explain a lot, since I just realized that the most glaring bugs concern combat, systems, invo UI and exploration/encounter density/map design, which they no doubt would have swooped down on immediately.