Game has to be a shallow FPS for Ryan to like it.
How long has Adam been a giant for?
The thing to keep in mind is that developing games is difficult. I understand Meg's distress, "I would rather they would wait 3 weeks than release a game that deletes someone's character" but the problem is no matter how much QA you put into a piece of software, any software, not just video games, there WILL be bugs. Whether it's the platform's issue, a network issue, or the developer's issue. And although the results of that bug were huge, the actual error may have been really small. And when you are reading the same code over and over for hours on end, often working overtime unpaid, as was just discussed in TheKnow, it should be acceptable that some bugs slip through the cracks, if for no other reason than these poor codemonkey's have families and lives. I am a code monkey and I approve this message.
TLDR: bugs slip by, especially during crunchtime. I've seen it happen on many different projects I myself have worked on.
Will we ever see an improvement or will it get even worse looking forward?
note - it still takes damage from grenades, just from enemies = friendlyfire
For faster results, do this during a wave where there are a lot of grenadiers present. Or kill enemies, leave two alive (both grenade mobs) to spawn the next wave. You should probably have 10+ of them spawned to make things faster.
Just make sure your teammates stop shooting at them once you are about to get their attention.
NOTE: Posted this for console users who cannot do the infinite stats glitch.
This is a bit absurd, but funny, because it was released within the same day as the patch.
COPY PASTA From : https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/4fs4...
I work in QA for a tech company. "Test it!" is such a misunderstood phrase, it's unbelievable. I just deleted a much longer rant, but TL;DR: you're talking specifically about a system that has nearly limitless variable combinations between the hardware and software options. Lots of bugs aren't excusable, but there should be some understanding as to why console has an easier time of things. Games are more complex these days, and there are only so many ways to simulate testing on different types of machines.
Here's the other thing: everyone has shitty development timelines. "We'll build this game over 2 years and leave 6 months for QA! Oh shit, we're 4 months past our deadline.... 2 months for QA at least! Well.... QA said they found these 200 bugs. 4 of them are critical and would take a month to fix. 50 of them are still high priority and would take 2 months to fix. All of the rest would take another 2 months. Well, we'll get most of the big ones out of the way, at least. We can patch in the rest of them."
^This happens. It takes a really dedicated (read overworked) team to tackle it, or you end up making sacrifices in the game. I have a very dedicated team at my office, but even then, hurried work is not often your best work.
Really interesting insight you're giving. With the recent controversy about crunchtimes surfacing, it seems the fact that developing a AAA game is a massive undertaking with a lot of strings attached is more relevant than ever before. We're living in a scary time. I really hope developers, publishers, and consumers can figure this problem out soon.
I remember one of Ryan’s complaints about Dark Souls was the story. So I have to disagree, Ryan should not play Dark Souls 3. The story is difficult enough to pick up without skipping around. I remember starting Dark Souls 2. I found a bunch of Firekeepers sitting around not doing anything. Then I found a Divine Blessing whose description basically read, a Divine Blessing from a deity long since forgotten. At that point I understood where I was, more or less. However, all of that is meaningless without having a deep understanding of Dark Souls 1. I remember Gus once asked what does the name Dark Souls refer to. That is a fundamental part of the Dark Souls lore, and it is never mentioned in Dark Souls 2 (and probably not 3 either). The reason that bit of lore is not mentioned is because it is information that is known only by the high level beings of the Dark Souls universe, and you killed most of them in Dark Souls 1.
Dark Souls 1 is not that outdated. It is still perfectly playable. You are not going back to The Witcher or even Dragon Age: Origins. Dark Souls is a modern game. I would recommend you play Dark Souls 1. However, if you must play a current gen game, play Bloodborne. The story is self-contained, and everything in the game is simplified. Bloodborne is incredibly easy to pick up in comparison to Dark Souls.
As a side note, as a Dark Souls fan there are many annoying things about the Dark Souls community, but I have to say that a persecution complex is not a huge or unique problem in the community. For whatever reason people love to attack people who hate their favorite games. I do not particularly like shooters. I prefer action-adventure games (Witcher, Dark Souls, Metal Gear Solid, Last of Us, etc.). That means that I do not particularly enjoy Halo, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Gears of War, etc. Oh the shit I have heard because of that.
Star Citizen in a pay to win Eve online copy, but ill still play it anyways
Adam totally dwarfs that chair lmao
Ryan nailed it with the halforc assumption, she indeed is a halforc
My brain did a fart thing. I took like 3 minutes trying to figure out what you were saying. I kept thinking "WTF is a Hal Fork?". gg brain. gg
You'll get shit from any community if you say their game sucks be it Souls, Halo, CS, Cod whatever. If you say their favorite game/game series sucks then they will give you shit, or give you reasons why they think you're wrong.
Join the conversation! Log in to post a comment.