Just in case people weren't aware :)
What's the point to release a ptb if is not the latest version..
They want us to test what? A buggy mess version and being infuriated towards them?
I really can't understand them
I...have no idea. Maybe there wasn't time to put the latest version on the ptb or something. Does seem a bit pointless testing an outdated version of a killer though.
Yeah, how dare these devs release a ptb and then make changes based on what information on that version of the content gets discovered. Who does that?
I hope they release the latest PTB as well.
I'm not really sure what you mean
Umh? I know what's the point of the ptb, I'm just saying, what's the point of this ptb when there's another version that makes the current one useless to test?
He literally confirmed that the ptb they had released was a week behind all the changes hes already made. (So it was a week behind when it first came out) it has nothing to do with feedback.
Maybe due to covid things get delayed.
That's a fair point. Honestly it's a relief they didn't actually think ptb blight is a killer worth releasing.
It could be that based on the feedback that they get they can confirm some of their changes that didn't get tested were good ideas or not. Nothing ground breaking but at least it's something they can get out of doing it like this.
When the data we are providing is based on an already outdated build, that is bad because it means the data is potentially useless.
can't you see.
obviously the guy in the video don't know what DEV want to do.
DEV want to let us try the old version.
and put the newest one when it come out.
so DEV can do nothing change but said they listen to the come back to change the killer
Well thats good to hear. The devs think Blight's ability is weak too and they already started changing it. And even if the next version is trash or op there's always the hotfix that follows. Blight just might take us by surprise yet.
If there's a week of changes that make him less frustrating...why are we playing and giving feedback on the frustrating version? That's my question.
Yeah, I'm not even bothering with this PTB anymore, not even if they release their current build. Testing it so far has now turned out to be a waste of time, and I do not appreciate having my time wasted this way.
This is some serious Amateur Hour going on.
Very weird way of doing things, I'll agree.
...they've already made changes though. They made the changes before we got the PTB. What is the point of releasing a PTB with a version of a Killer that you've already adjusted accordingly in another build?
I wonder if it was intentionally released in an inferior state so that the reaction upon his 'changes' would be a super-positive one.
I think the reason they released tge ptb was to fit with the schedule of all the previous killers recently where they put the ptb out and then 2 weeks later then killer. They didn't want people to disappointed that there was a delay in the killer. Personally I'm just glad that we got to look at the killer and survivor, plus the reworked maps. I figured they would streamline blight on live though
This has been my issue with PTB for a bit. Why are we testing a build that isn't exactly relevant anymore? I'll gladly take time to test out and give feedback to the newest iteration of him.
Thing is hasn't the devs done this plenty of times. They should know we want to test out the newest iteration. If they could clarify what prevents them from keeping us up to date on the build I'd be more understanding but usually it's just "not enough time" and I'm left to speculate. Yeah I'm basically asking them to over explain such a simple thing but not enough time could literally be because of anything. Even so I feel like we should still take time to test this stuff. Most of us opt into the PTB because we want to give them feedback. I can't recall many times we got to test out more than one iteration of a killer during the ptb phase.
Good, because his PTB version is absolute......
...His PTB version plays the way his face looks....
It’s behaviors way. Do the dumbest, most backwards @$$ thing. Likely isn’t even another build there. What sense would it make to release a build that is this bad when there is supposedly a better build.
Uhm, you do realize that they can't just shove the dev build onto servers, right? They have to compile out a playable version, load in player data, then load I into a server. This takes time. It's the same reason PTB saves are old. It takes time to do. You've literally never played the most current build on a PTB because it's always outdated. Hell, the live versions are always outdated when they're released.
See a proper response like this isn't so hard is it? Just tell us the process on why it's not do-able at the time and we good.
Speaking as a developer myself (though not for games), there's a major difference between "not live" and "so different from live that developer doesn't want to put up with the frustrations in the PTB". One is acceptable and unavoidable. But if the week of changes makes a huge difference in how Blight is played, then there's no point in gathering user data since they've already made major changes. User testing is generally done at the very end, not when there are still major changes to be made.
It's also completely unavoidable. Just look at the Billy rework, and the overheat changes. If the adjustments that created "Live Billy" had been made in the week up to the PTB the devs would have been frustrated playing PTB Billy with his harsher overheat.
PTB content is literally unfinished content. This means that it's source is always being changed and tweaked leading up to, and following, the PTB.
As for there being no point, going back to my Billy example again the response to his PTB would have confirmed for them their changes to reduce overheat severity were good. For Blight, we don't know what the changes are. It could be the very things everyone is suggesting they do to make him better. In which case, it's still useful, because it confirms their changes.
Or it could be little QoL things that aren't relevant to the mechanics themselves, just the feel of playing. Like a higher pov (I personally I'm not a big fan of playing shorter Killers because it's harder to see) or less jankiness in his movement. Which means all input on the power is still fully valid.
And beyond that, the PTB is also for testing the map changes. Finding bugs like the ones on the Yamaoka maps. No changes to Blight will impact that part of the testing.
Beyond all that, they're on a deadline. They have a schedule to keep and delaying the PTB a week - and in turn the chapter itself - to add whatever changes they've made would be a pretty drastic step. One that would require said changes themselves to be drastic to be worth doing. If it's just QoL, that doesn't even come close, nor would simple power tweaks.
And since we don't know what's different between the two builds it's impossible to say the PTB feedback is pointless.
You're misunderstanding my point about PTB versus live.
Let me use my work's process and DbD terms to explain.
Generally speaking, there are four chapters being worked on at any given point in time. Oni was just released, Deathslinger is in testing, Pyramid Head is in development, and Blight is in planning. When we do a user test, or a PTB in this case, it would contain what we believed to be the finished product of Deathslinger and his chapter. At that point we think we've done everything we can to make Deathslinger a success, Zarina a success, and Dead Dawg a success. If the user test goes poorly, we take that feedback back and alter Deathslinger and then release Deathslinger to live. Then PHead moves to testing, Blight to development, and chapter 18 is started at a planning phase.
What I'm saying is so problematic about what we're seeing here is that the thing that's being user tested is still in development. At BEST it's in system test, the last phase of testing before showing the users. That's not when you show the users what you have, you do that after all of your internal work is done. One of the greatest failings in the game industry with PTBs I believe is the fact that PTBs are expected to be buggy because they're still working out the kinks. That's too early for a PTB. You release the PTB when you think you're done testing. Then the users come in, try things out, find bugs and exploits you didn't know about, and tell you if the new content feels the way you think it should.
What you don't do is release something that you know is irrelevant and call that the user test. If we did that at my work we'd be out of a job extremely fast. "Yeah, this is the new screen on the application that you requested. We know it's kinda hard to navigate but don't worry, we have it fixed. Just can't show you today." That doesn't fly in non-game software development and it shouldn't here. There's no point in running a user test if the users can't test what the devs think is the final product. None at all.
Edit: to use your argument that "we will never have what the devs have in a PTB"...you're correct. Our user tests don't have PHead in my example, and they don't have Blight, because those aren't ready to show. PHead is being developed still, and Blight is still being planned. No point in showing the users a half-done PHead. But Deathslinger should be done at the point users are getting to look at him.
The problem with that is that all games are being developed right up to the last second. And beyond, these days. Games are being tweaked and modified right up to the moment they go gold, and the release version is shipped off, and then the dev team goes back work tweaking and polishing and by the time the release version hits consumers there's already a day 1 patch.
DLC development runs on exactly the same process. They make everything they can as best as they can by the deadline, then ship, then go back to work on adjusting it. In this case the "gone gold" moment for the PTB was the point they packaged up the PTB build. After they hit that point and "shipped" they went back to adjusting and tweaking just as they will after the live version goes gold. And by the time we buy that DLC they'll have already made changes to it internally. It's a never ending process, especially on live games. Waiting until it's "done" is completely infeasible.
They're not going to stop polishing something they could still potentially improve just because a test build has been released. They're still going to use that time between compiling the build and it releasing for testing to work on it more, rather than sitting around twiddling their thumbs waiting for feedback.
And again, we don't know the degree of variance between PTB Blight and in house Blight. It could simply by a few small value changes that ultimately make him feel better, and they could have even been ideas they had after the PTB build was finalized, changes they hadn't even expected to make when setting up the PTB.
Imagine, for a moment, you're part of a team panting a mural on a wall. The person who hired you wants you to send them a photo update every hour, showing your progress. So, every hour, someone snaps a picture of the mural. While they're sending the photo everyone else is still painting. It takes 20 minutes from the time the photo is taken until the employer receives it.
Should the painters stop working during that time? Should they just wait 20 minutes to hear what the opinion is? Or should they just keep going, and apply any feedback they receive to whatever they've done in the meantime? If you were the employer would you be more upset that they keep stopping, delaying completion, or that your progress reports are outdated?
You also have to consider the current situation. BHVR is working from home, not the office, which is likely causing delays in production, but they're still operating on the same time table, so I wouldn't be surprised if Blight were a little less far along than other Killers were at the time of their PTBs.
Edit: NVM this post.