bit-gamer.net

RTW wants APB improvement suggestions

RTW wants APB improvement suggestions

Realtime Worlds' APB was released earlier this month to poor reviews despite strong sales.

Scottish developer Realtime Worlds has called for APB players to submit suggestions about how the game could be improved since the team finally has the time to work on them.

Previously, Realtime Worlds has been focused on launching APB and getting it stable enough to play - but now that the final product has launched the team is looking to patch things up.

"Over the last number of months, through the closed beta and KTTC, we've collected a huge number of issues, complaints, suggestions and requests covering all aspects of the game," wrote Realtime's Neil Castle on the official website - which is presumably where you should consider sending your ideas.

"Because of the focus of getting the game stable and going through the process of launch, many of these (especially the ones requiring significant changes) may appear to have fallen through the cracks.

"But they didn't," he added, "they've been sitting in our rather copious 'to do' list, waiting for us to have the time to begin to address them properly."

"This is your chance to help us prioritise our development efforts to tackle the issues that most concern you or add the features that you most want," he said.

APB has enjoyed strong sales but has suffered from middling to poor reviews. Phill took an especially dim view of the game in our APB review.

Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

14 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Unknownsock 14th July 2010, 11:54 Quote
I know this game isn't as good as everyone thought but i really hope they listen to the community.
It has so much potential imo.

Still fun in its own right with the current version though.
NuTech 14th July 2010, 12:01 Quote
I find it funny how these proposed 'improvements' fly in the face of everything Dave Jones (APB's Creative Director) said in a Eurogamer interview only a couple days ago.

One example, when asked about the APB's poor car handling -

From the Eurogamer interview:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Jones
No. I think this is a black and white thing as well. I don't think we need to tweak the vehicle handling. For every person who says,'‘Oh my God, I just don't get the vehicle handling in this game', I can find people who say it's quite realistic and it's skillful and you have to plan ahead a little bit. But it's not an arcade-style driving game. It was specifically meant to be fairly realistic and fairly challenging. However, a lot of players come to this game unfortunately with PCs that aren't quite up to spec.

From the mission statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Castle
We're already underway on a major overhaul to vehicle handling to make cars more responsive and less slippy overall. You'll still be able to power slide around corners in stylish fashion, but steering is more responsive overall and easier to get the hang of early on.

There are more examples of statements like this if you compare the two links.

I'm not saying Dave Jones was wrong for defending his game, but you have to ask, what is going on at a studio when in the space of less than a week, two top developers publicly contradict each other.

Does not bode well IMO. Also, none of this is new information, they had feedback from hundreds of beta testers all telling them the same thing. These improvements should have been done before release - you don't get a second chance at a first impression.
impar 14th July 2010, 13:04 Quote
Greetings!

"Rome Total War wants All Points Bulletin improvements suggestions"
:|
Glix 14th July 2010, 13:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by impar
Greetings!

"Rome Total War wants All Points Bulletin improvements suggestions"
:|

No thats just you.
LeMaltor 14th July 2010, 15:27 Quote
I read it as Rome Total War too.
craigbru 14th July 2010, 16:42 Quote
While I appreciate RTW wanting to take the time to make improvements, isn't that what the beta was for? Shouldn't any issues be resolved before release? I'd rather have a game delayed, than have it released as rubbish.
Hovis 14th July 2010, 18:22 Quote
The biggest change they seem to be touting is to the matchmaking system, and it sounds like they are making it tougher on everybody, but tough in a fairer way. The idea seems to be that they are going to remove the ability to refuse dispatches, so you won't be able to turn down a mission assignment because you don't like the look of the opponents. Apparently loads of people were turning down tough assignments and it was causing poor unfortunates who didn't know better to pick up the slack and get smashed up by vastly more powerful groups.
NuTech 14th July 2010, 18:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
The biggest change they seem to be touting is to the matchmaking system, and it sounds like they are making it tougher on everybody, but tough in a fairer way. The idea seems to be that they are going to remove the ability to refuse dispatches, so you won't be able to turn down a mission assignment because you don't like the look of the opponents. Apparently loads of people were turning down tough assignments and it was causing poor unfortunates who didn't know better to pick up the slack and get smashed up by vastly more powerful groups.
Wait, what! You mean that the exact thing people complained about in the beta, is being complained about in the full game?

If only there was a period of time before a game's release when such things could be tested and improved upon...
Hovis 14th July 2010, 18:51 Quote
Yeah they went about beta testing in a very odd way. They went months of just letting people play for two hour sessions, then they did a couple of weekenders, then they did I think one or two months, tops, of actual balls to the wall 24 rolling testing, not very much at all.

Apparently a lot of the data they gathered didn't chime with expectations, so it caused confusion and thus, apparently, inaction on a lot of these core issues. In their naivety they didn't realise that people would rather sit doing nothing for ten minutes rather than get into a mission against worthy opponents. :)

I didn't actually hate the matchmaking system that much anyway, I think most top grade group players didn't, but then why would we when we are the folks who benefit most?
MarkW7 14th July 2010, 21:21 Quote
Thanks for the info, i'm writing in.
CardJoe 14th July 2010, 23:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
The biggest change they seem to be touting is to the matchmaking system, and it sounds like they are making it tougher on everybody, but tough in a fairer way. The idea seems to be that they are going to remove the ability to refuse dispatches, so you won't be able to turn down a mission assignment because you don't like the look of the opponents. Apparently loads of people were turning down tough assignments and it was causing poor unfortunates who didn't know better to pick up the slack and get smashed up by vastly more powerful groups.

That sounds even worse. You are forced to play a mission with other people? Forced to do something you would have chosen not to?

Way to encourage teamwork and participation. People will either stop playing completely, or they'll just ignore the mission they are forced into.
cheeriokilla 15th July 2010, 00:37 Quote
Here's some piece of advice... you made a great pimp my ride/total makeover game... How about you dedicate the same levels of effort on delivering on the actual gameplay-side. Car handling is terrible, animations are lacking, missions are repetitive....
Hovis 15th July 2010, 05:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hovis
The biggest change they seem to be touting is to the matchmaking system, and it sounds like they are making it tougher on everybody, but tough in a fairer way. The idea seems to be that they are going to remove the ability to refuse dispatches, so you won't be able to turn down a mission assignment because you don't like the look of the opponents. Apparently loads of people were turning down tough assignments and it was causing poor unfortunates who didn't know better to pick up the slack and get smashed up by vastly more powerful groups.

That sounds even worse. You are forced to play a mission with other people? Forced to do something you would have chosen not to?

Way to encourage teamwork and participation. People will either stop playing completely, or they'll just ignore the mission they are forced into.

The alternative is everybody sits around waiting for a soft assignment, like they do now. Clearly it's not working with the current system, with the crucial comment that I read from the RTW dev blog on the subject being along the lines of them not realising just how often people would turn down missions. When I played as an Enforcer it was perfectly possible for me to avoid anything that looked like a difficult job. High threat targets? Nah. More than two of them? Oooh, might be a team, pass. Solo lowbie? Fandabidozy, fire up the Quattro.

The Criminals already face involuntary mission assignments, when the Enforcers get the option to chase them, and take it, then said Criminal is in play. When I play (as a Criminal) it's a safe bet if I roll with my usual crew only newbs will come after us, because the smart players, the ones concerned with their stats and K/D ratios, know they are destined for an extreme physical discourtesy by stepping to us. Fact is because you don't get to pick your battles as much as a criminal you tend to have to earn your threat level the hard way, and it puts stat-minded Enforcers off. Newbs, bless them, don't know any better, besides which they get paid more for harder targets, and the game sends as many at us as it can find, often as many as eight, and we mash them into a Newbie Smoothie and slurp it up. They don't like that, and it's not something they were supposed to do, it's not their job to be pulped for the LULZ of organised squad players, at least not as often as they are.

If I roll solo however there's not a newb in sight, what I get is teams of massively tooled up nutters who haven't seen daylight since launch day descending on me in teams. And that doesn't just happen to me, it happens to pretty much every criminal player who ever gets caught alone. Ironically the only fights that a lowbie or team of lowbies might win are usually horned in on by players who really ought to have better things to do.

So in effect the new system makes life harder all round, but more so for the Enforcers, which is about bloody time because, as an avid Criminal player, I'm starting to feel like a glorified mob, spawned into the world to be harvested and exchanged for rewards like a heavily customised Murloc. I mean if we're all got to suffer it's better we all suffer equally.

I don't think players ignoring missions they are assigned to is really much of an issue either, because you've got nothing to lose by not fighting. If you run you lose anyway, so you might as well go down swinging, pick up some kills, pick up more money, maybe get lucky and win. I'm fairly optimistic that after a period of adjustment (read: Enforcers who've been slacking on engaging hard targets getting crucified and having their inflated threat levels stuffed up their arses) things ought to work out better. A tougher but fairer system is more likely to satisfy players. because it is fairness that has been lacking from the game. The current system actively rewards a very nasty, predatory approach, and that is really punishing those players who for whatever reason (be they new, alone, in a pick up group or whatever) can be singled out as prey.
ModeZt 15th July 2010, 05:19 Quote
I will never understand those idiots whining about car handling. Car handling is controlled by the server, so you have to push the button 100ms earlier when you have a 100ms ping. There's nothing bad in it. This is the only way it can be programmed for all the physics to work correctly.
I enjoy driving and I've seen a lot of good drivers on the servers. Sometimes the ping delay is annoying and you fail to evade an AI controlled truck making a sudden turn, but that's not such a big deal.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums