PDA

View Full Version : BF2142 & ET:QW delayed - FeaRog (SD dev) speaks.


Zandog
08-27-2006, 01:44 PM
Originally posted by: Sir. Eden:

This was FeaRog's very big and great reply to the conserns about delaying ET:QW and about its competition BF2142.

It should be noted that companys X & Y do not represent EA/Dice & SD


Originally Posted by Tristan 'Fearog' Williams
mclutter - If you are a petroleum/chemical engineer as you seem to imply then you would know the answer to this. It is a basic management principle and if you studied at any decent institution then it should have been deeply ingrained in your brain: if you rush to meet a deadline by doing overtime then you drastically increase the chances of making mistakes. Sure, you may meet the deadline, but those mistakes will later be exposed - either by a poor performing product, an unreliable product, a product that has non-functional features, or a product that is just plain dangerous. At the end of the day meeting a deadline or extending a deadline is a value judgement - do you sacrifice functionality and run the risk of making mistakes just to meet a deadline, or do you push the deadline back a bit to allow you to take the time to fix all the problems, and make the product as perfect as you can? In some industries/situations this is not an option, which is very unfortunate as it reduces the quality of their products, ****es consumers off, and makes everyone less money at the end of the day.

Now, the case where there is direct competition: Consider the aerospace industry. Companies X & Y might design a plane to meet the same spec. X meets the deadline, but does it by forcing employees to do 80 hour weeks, and desperately hiring a bunch of extras. At the end of the project all of their experienced staff quit because they don't want to do 80 hour weeks. The plane goes into service, but has poor performance, high maintenance costs, and a high accident rate. Eventually they fix it, but after years of recalls and revisions. Company Y misses the deadline by a few months, but they maintain a 40 hour week, and only hire extra staff if they are really perfect for the position. Their plane goes into service with excellent performance, low maintenance costs, and low accident rate - simply because less mistakes were made during the design, less time was spent fixing mistakes, and more time was spent improving important subsystems. Now consider the airlines when they're looking to buy new planes - only a small proportion of the highest consumers (the "hardcore" airlines if you will) will jump on the initial release of a plane, the rest will wait a year or two to see how they pan out. So a few airlines buy plane X and fly the hell out of them in the months before plane Y is released - company X gets a tidy lead at the start there. Then plane Y is released and a few airlines buy them and fly the hell out of them - given the same spec, they'll probably sell equally well for a while. Now, a year or two down the line when the other airlines are looking to expand/upgrade their fleet some they will look at the accumulated performance figures, maintenance costs and accident rates for the two planes to compare. Undoubtedly, they will notice that plane Y is a better performer, and more of those airlines will purchase plane Y. To make matters worse, company X lost all their best staff so the next design they make will suffer even more. So the moral there is: Whilst rushing and crunching to meet a deadline may be beneficial in the short term, it is detrimental in the long term in a competitive environment.

Now that is just the case where they are direct competitors for the exact same market space - if the two plane designs deviated more (eg different range/payload balances) then you'd get more airlines buying either one depending on their own needs/preferences. This is closer to the relationship between 2142 and ETQW - whilst outwardly they both are online, team based, multiplayer FPS games, when you get down to it the gameplay is a drastically different style between the two. BF is open and free-form, which some people prefer, and ET is close, directed, and channeled which other people prefer. Each to their own.

So two big holes in your gripe are these: ETQW is not meant to be a direct competitor to BF2142, so is not competing for the exact same market space, so a delay in release is not as catastrophic as you contend. Second, by delaying the game we get to provide you guys with a far more polished experience, rather than a buggy, unbalanced POS like some games are at release - that will be reflected strongly in reviews and even more strongly on forums, which will affect potential buyers.

Finally, consider this too: Lots of people can only afford to buy a new game every few months. Now, lets say hypothetically that we released at the same time as BF2142. This would mean that a substantial number of people would have to choose which one they'd buy - some would buy our game, some would buy 2142. Chances are they probably would not buy the other one until it was out on budget release. Now - again I must stress, hypothetical here - lets say ETQW was released a few months after 2142. Those people who bought 2142 and have been playing it online for a few months now have their piggy banks full up with cash again, read some reviews (hopefully good ones! /me prays) for our game, and pops out and buys it. Buying one does not equal not buying the other!

Summary: I think you make it out to be a much bigger deal than it really is.

Trust us - we didn't delay to **** you off, or lose sales. We delayed so that we could make the game better, and provide you guys with a better experience at the end of the day. Have a bit of patience, we think you'll like the end result!:)

Originally replying to this post for those who need it.
Originally Posted by mclutter
I agree with what everyone has said.

Here is my main beef. We live in a world with deadlines and when those deadlines are not met there are consequences. For instance, I work in the oil industry and when I do not have my design work in on time the whole project gets delayed. Every company has deadlines and when these deadlines are not kept it trickles down from there. I am only trying to say that there needs to be some accountability here. Lets make a solid date and stick to it. Maybe some overtime is warranted or some new people hired to make it happen. Enough with the "I rather have it done right" crap. I sit here reading through all the different forums on ET:QW and for the most part everyone is giving the ok to spend more time to "get it right". What is really funny is that on all the forums recently regarding BF2 the general population who has played through all the crap patches stood together and demanded beta testing of patches and beta testing of BF2142. Guess what it is now being done. EA has realized that the public is their bread and butter and we now get to test the 1.4 patch for BF2 and test BF2142. With that in mind give the public a beta for ET:QW. These guys have apparently been working on this game for some time now. Lets give some fresh eyes a look, and honestly these guys should be able to isolate the problems and fix them within a reasonable amount of time.Get it done!

I think companies like EA and Activision need to stop the damn politics and get down to business and cater to the consumer cause thats who they are working for.

It should also be noted that this is not an offical responce but just the opinion of one of the developers.

Masterstyle
08-27-2006, 02:14 PM
It better not be an "official response" id be a little ticked if 2142 was delayed

Chant
08-27-2006, 05:10 PM
interesting indeed :)

MrBenis
08-28-2006, 02:23 AM
*Yawn* a barely conceiled attack at 2142 as you near the end.

ReaperOfsouls
08-28-2006, 02:25 AM
*Yawn* a barely conceiled attack at 2142 as you near the end.

Yurp.

ET and 2142 are to totally diffrent games I hate when people try to compare them like they have a lot in common.

Donkey
08-28-2006, 02:30 AM
Very good read :)

ET:QW and Bf2142 are similar, but can not be compared...

ReaperOfsouls
08-28-2006, 02:38 AM
Similar nothing.

Other than the fact that they have guns, are based in the future, and have vehicles there are no other similarites.

Gameplay is totally diffrent. 2142 can support up to 64 and ET ony 16 last I herd. 2142 has a global ranking system with unlocks and awards.

ET does not.

Deadeye313
08-28-2006, 03:24 AM
16?! WTF? come on, you can't, in this day and age, hope to sell any copies of a game that relies on it's multiplayer if the player limit is below 32. I for one won't be buying ET if it's just 16 ppl on the server. It seems like a waste of what sounded like a much bigger game.

Zandog
08-28-2006, 04:08 AM
Yurp.

ET and 2142 are to totally diffrent games I hate when people try to compare them like they have a lot in common.

I think, no wait. I know that's exactly what the opening post is trying to point out.

16?! WTF? come on, you can't, in this day and age, hope to sell any copies of a game that relies on it's multiplayer if the player limit is below 32. I for one won't be buying ET if it's just 16 ppl on the server. It seems like a waste of what sounded like a much bigger game.

Well, your in luck! ReaperOfsouls was misinformed. The game supports 32+ It's a good investment to read the thread post and know about the game your talking about before you post anything.

Dangerdog
08-28-2006, 04:13 AM
ET is 24 player (by design), everyone says it's just a performance recomendation cap and if you have the server and bandwidth you can push the number higher, but yes ET is trying to focus on well defined fronts and choke points to keep the action concentrated on one part of the map at a time, not all over the board "do what you want" kind of play in BF2142.

I agree though, by waiting and polishing Quake Wars they'll end up better off in the end rather than trying to compete against BF2142. Quake Wars has more competition with UT2007 and Crysis than it does with BF2142.

Now that DICE has opened the doors to beta testing and providing feedback everyone is waiting to see if they take the advise or just says “thanks but no thanks” and does it their way.

CrysisPwnz
08-28-2006, 04:17 AM
Yurp.

ET and 2142 are to totally diffrent games I hate when people try to compare them like they have a lot in common.


QFT. Now... Im thinking if I should read that very long post...

cantina_fly
08-28-2006, 04:30 AM
I only intend to buy one of the two. So in my book, they ARE in the same class. I'm growing more and more jaded by the "I don't give a **** about my team, as long as I get my points" attitude that BF2 and 2142 are bringing out in the community.

I spent most of my recent game time playing POE2, and it was a breath of fresh air. Accurate weapons, people squading up and working together, it was wonderfull. I think ET:QW will be the same way since your "promotions" only last for that round. People more focused on winning the match, and less on me, me, me.

$.02

CrysisPwnz
08-28-2006, 04:36 AM
And again BF2 has wrongfully influenced one of our fellow gaming citizen... Bad seed that one is... a bad seed.

Im getting both... probably get more into BF2142 though, but when I get bored of that or something evil comes along like in BF2 I'll switch over to QW

DeAdCrAp
08-28-2006, 04:57 AM
yay cuz im gettin my new computer in januraury so ya!!!!

Splinter
08-28-2006, 06:25 AM
mclutter... hmm
I've seen him posting on here.
Was having a go at some of the Take guys.

Sim
08-28-2006, 10:56 AM
I think a lot of people are waiting on demos of QW:ET and BF2142.
I hope DICE releases another beta build so we can see if they will take the time to fix problems unlike in BF2.

If you ask me i think more people will buy QW:ET before they buy BF2142, unless DICE releases a really good demo of it.
I know a lot of people have a bad taste in their mouths cause of patches dice has released for bf2, so if dice want this game to be a hit they better step it up big time.

Deadeye313
08-28-2006, 02:20 PM
I only intend to buy one of the two. So in my book, they ARE in the same class. I'm growing more and more jaded by the "I don't give a **** about my team, as long as I get my points" attitude that BF2 and 2142 are bringing out in the community.

I spent most of my recent game time playing POE2, and it was a breath of fresh air. Accurate weapons, people squading up and working together, it was wonderfull. I think ET:QW will be the same way since your "promotions" only last for that round. People more focused on winning the match, and less on me, me, me.

$.02

Do you realize that most of the ways to get points in these games requires teamwork?

most of the people who have the most points are tank drivers, medics and support.

Tank drivers kill people, that helps the team no what you may think.

medics with high scores are keeping their fellow men alive and healed, if you don't want that, go play counterstrike where you can't be healed at all and then come back and complain about medics.

Support guys can lay down a ton of fire and resupply their fellow man's grenades for anti-infantry work, or rockets for Anti-tank guys. A high scoring support guy either killed a lot of the enemy (always a good thing) or resupplied his team alot, or both.

So, before you talk realize that you can't make points in this game unless you're a great shot or great with teamwork.

Eden
08-28-2006, 02:56 PM
Lol I had to laugh at some of those replys obviously some of you didnt even bother reading it if you had you would have read the dev saying the following.

This is closer to the relationship between 2142 and ETQW - whilst outwardly they both are online, team based, multiplayer FPS games, when you get down to it the gameplay is a drastically different style between the two. BF is open and free-form, which some people prefer, and ET is close, directed, and channeled which other people prefer. Each to their own.

Zandog
08-28-2006, 03:03 PM
Lol I had to laugh at some of those replys obviously some of you didnt even bother reading it if you had you would have read the dev saying the following.

^^^ Thats the smartest thing said in this thread so far ^^^

madness
08-28-2006, 03:26 PM
Gameplay is totally diffrent. 2142 can support up to 64 and ET ony 16 last I herd. 2142 has a global ranking system with unlocks and awards.

ET does not.

yeah..and I heard bf2142 only supports 8 ppl. :rolleyes:

In ET you gain unlocks during rounds, and lose them after campaign ends. There is a basic stats system too, that keeps track of your kills, death etc. but no permanent unlocks that f**k newcomers in the face..

MrBenis
08-29-2006, 02:52 AM
yeah..and I heard bf2142 only supports 8 ppl. :rolleyes:

In ET you gain unlocks during rounds, and lose them after campaign ends. There is a basic stats system too, that keeps track of your kills, death etc. but no permanent unlocks that f**k newcomers in the face..

I fail to see how weapons like the G36E, PKM and F2000.. or any other unlock could be sooo good that they fundamentally screw over new players.

It's the individual skill of the combatant that matters, having the unlocks is nothing more than an indication of experience.

CrysisPwnz
08-29-2006, 04:20 AM
not really, only how long you've played..remember a person who gets 1 point a round can eventually make it up to sergeant major...

madness
08-29-2006, 02:52 PM
I fail to see how weapons like the G36E, PKM and F2000.. or any other unlock could be sooo good that they fundamentally screw over new players.

It's the individual skill of the combatant that matters, having the unlocks is nothing more than an indication of experience.

You can tell that "all weapons are totally equal" story to some other idiot. Maybe he'll believe it..:rolleyes:
and besides weapons there are also other equipment, like flashbangs.

3lliot3vans
08-29-2006, 04:01 PM
True i agree with time shows experiance,

Lol at "all weapons are totally equal" story :laugh:

CrysisPwnz
08-29-2006, 09:13 PM
He's not saying they're all equal, you should re-read what he said because its absolutely true... It's not liek everyone is going to unlock a Voss and then suddenly get 50-0 scores.

cantina_fly
08-29-2006, 09:21 PM
Do you realize that most of the ways to get points in these games requires teamwork?

most of the people who have the most points are tank drivers, medics and support.

Tank drivers kill people, that helps the team no what you may think.

medics with high scores are keeping their fellow men alive and healed, if you don't want that, go play counterstrike where you can't be healed at all and then come back and complain about medics.

Support guys can lay down a ton of fire and resupply their fellow man's grenades for anti-infantry work, or rockets for Anti-tank guys. A high scoring support guy either killed a lot of the enemy (always a good thing) or resupplied his team alot, or both.

So, before you talk realize that you can't make points in this game unless you're a great shot or great with teamwork.
Lets not confuse "Teamwork Points" with real teamwork. You couldn't have picked three better examples. In all three cases, that player picked that role because it would allow him to get the most points. The fact that it's helping the team is a distant second to them (more of a side effect.) I know there are execptions, and I love a good medic as much as the next guy, but for every good medic I've encountered, I find 4 more who revive me over and over just so I can die again. Why? Points.

My personal test is when the other team is down to one flag. Are you actively trying to take that flag and win the game, or do you spawn rape them?

It's been a long time since I've seen the former because everyone's figured out you get more points doing the later. In both cases, you win the round, but if you go for the win, the other team doesn't have to suffer through the spawn killing and you can get on with a fresh round. Also, in the chaos of taking that last flag, it gives the losing team a better chance to break out and make a game of it again.

CrysisPwnz
08-29-2006, 11:26 PM
I hate the "omg stop reviving me NUB MEDIx" thing... its not nub, considering you can SO easily get out of it...

Deadeye313
08-30-2006, 01:36 AM
so if a guy has lots of points, it's not because he's running around reviving/resupplying, helping his team, or killing more of the enemy so that his team wins. He's just a stat padding whore who wants a shiny new unlock?

Oh, ok. If that's the case, I wish there were more stat padders (except for maybe the ones who spawn rape or sit on runways waiting for jets).

CrysisPwnz
08-30-2006, 01:40 AM
Nah, everyone with a high score on helps the team. you cant argue with that unless they're straight up stat padding like getting friends to do the kill revive stuff. Tank whores, jet whores, campers, spawn campers all help.

cantina_fly
08-30-2006, 03:56 AM
Don't take this to extreme's guys. I made it a point to say there were exceptions to the rule. But I don't think calling anyone a <blank>whore is meant as a compliment (even if it "helps" your team win.) There are plenty of good players out there that help their team, but the smacktards are the ones that tend ot stick around in memory the longest. I don't want to start flaming over this, so this will be my last post on the subject. If you have anything more to add, feel free to PM me. :)