Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I apologize if this topic is too negative - But I hope the Offworld team appreciates criticism by the community.

Some brief questions to the devs about common concerns in the Squad community:

 - Why focus on performance heavy (but neat) things like dynamic foliage, barrel smoke etc. when the server-player sync is sweating at 70p, inf only, low detail maps? Will the server-player sync handle such things on a 100p vehicle map? Can you afford spending resources on this when there's sync issues already?

 

 - Some insiders have hinted you may have to abandon the 100p combined arms goal and stick with a smaller scale/fewer vehicles maps due to resource restrictions. Why are you adding more high resource features instead of abandoning these if they risk costing so much you must give up the 100p C.A. goal?

 

 - The current v. is poorly optimized for all, and worse still for AMD users. Current early alpha graphics are p. much on par with PR:BF2, and I can run these maxed at ~20FPS, when I can run the gorgeous Battlefront reboot at ~100fps, (64p with vehicles). Shouldn't optimizing/improving graphics be a #1 priority, rather than adding more content?

 

 - The design of the maps leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, the Russian maps+TrueSky look better, but still. What we've seen from the community artists/modders is gorgeous. What priority vs. adding more content is given to releasing mod tools atm? Will you, once mod tools are released, focus on working on the much needed polish of gameplay aspects like controls, optimizations, streamlining, and engine features, and let the community create most of the art and content like maps/new vehicles, with an efficient incorporation of the best of this to the base game?

 

 - What many people liked about the PR inf controls vs. those of, say, ArmA was the quicker, more responsive and direct, 'arcade-ish' feel since it felt like you were the soldier, whereas the hyper-realistic ArmA controls with delays, wobbly camera (which is 'realistic' - your head moves around IRL - but put on screen, you can't use the part of your brain that compensates for this to give a steady perception), and exaggerated endurance effects makes it feel like your soldier has brain damage from sniffing glue. If Squad is the spiritual successor to PR, and is "a balance of arcade, teamwork, and realism", why add hyper-realistic features that make controls less responsive and direct, like momentum while sprinting, excessive camera wobble, stamina effects on camera movement, breath hold for short range weps (which ruins suppressive fire), too much recoil climb vs. recoil spread, delayed animation start for switching weapons and reloading, etc., which makes it feel like someone else is controlling your character?

 

 - With the explosion of new players in a game where a good gameplay experience relies mostly on playing with like minded people, why not add things like automatic mic check to join certain servers and such tools to filter servers by desired play style? In Squad, you all too often have a bad time by only finding casual no mic players when you want teamwork, or only serious mic users getting annoyed at you for wanting to play casual without voice chat.

I hope you have time to answer some of this. Sincerely, Bollz and the community^_^

Edited by Ostboll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Devs won't spend time optimizing the game as they will have to add more feature i.e. Recode and UE4 being updated means recode aswell, so heavy optimizing the game currently would be wasting time. We need to be patient, the optimization will come in beta phase where almost all the content has be added, they could then focus on optimization

CMB

Sent from Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

 - Why focus on performance heavy (but neat) things like dynamic foliage, barrel smoke etc. when the server-player sync is sweating at 70p, inf only, low detail maps? Will the server-player sync handle such things on a 100p vehicle map? Can you afford spending resources on this when there's sync issues already?

 

There is a big difference between clientside only, visual improvements that tax the GPU, and serverside features that affect replication which is where the sync issues stem from.

 

22 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

- The current v. is poorly optimized for all, and worse still for AMD users. Current early alpha graphics are p. much on par with PR:BF2, and I can run these maxed at ~20FPS, when I can run the gorgeous Battlefront reboot at ~100fps, (64p with vehicles). Shouldn't optimizing/improving graphics be a #1 priority, rather than adding more content?

 

The AMD performance issues stem from some issues within Unreal Engine 4 itself, and have nothing todo with Offworld. It's up to Epic Games and AMD to continue working together to track down and fix the issues that are plaguing their hardware with UE4. The current graphics are nowhere near as outdated looking as PR:BF2, let's not be intellectually dishonest, it only makes you look like your exaggerating on purpose.

 

22 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

- What many people liked about the PR inf controls vs. those of, say, ArmA was the quicker, more responsive and direct, 'arcade-ish' feel since it felt like you were the soldier, whereas the hyper-realistic ArmA controls with delays, wobbly camera (which is 'realistic' - your head moves around IRL - but put on screen, you can't use the part of your brain that compensates for this to give a steady perception), and exaggerated endurance effects makes it feel like your soldier has brain damage from sniffing glue. If Squad is the spiritual successor to PR, and is "a balance of arcade, teamwork, and realism", why add hyper-realistic features that make controls less responsive and direct, like momentum while sprinting, excessive camera wobble, stamina effects on camera movement, breath hold for short range weps (which ruins suppressive fire), too much recoil climb vs. recoil spread, delayed animation start for switching weapons and reloading, etc., which makes it feel like someone else is controlling your character?

 

 - With the explosion of new players in a game where a good gameplay experience relies mostly on playing with like minded people, why not add things like automatic mic check to join certain servers and such tools to filter servers by desired play style? In Squad, you all too often have a bad time by only finding casual no mic players when you want teamwork, or only serious mic users getting annoyed at you for wanting to play casual without voice chat.

 

I actually like the direction the controls have been going and how they feel, I played PR for a long time and the ArmA series for over a decade, and Squad feels like a good mix between the two leaning towards a more FPS / Battlefield feel. I do agree that the delay between switching weapons is annoying, but it was in PR as well. The mic vs no-mic friction has always been in PR, I don't think that's an issue only with Squad but it would be nice to flag squads as Mic only or No Mic required with a visual icon as squad leader during creation so you don't have to waste title room.

 

Just another note, I don't think it's fair to say you speak for the entire community, because obviously some of the things you have mentioned are fairly subjective.

Edited by looter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What many people liked about the PR inf controls vs. those of, say, ArmA was the quicker, more responsive and direct, 'arcade-ish' feel since it felt like you were the soldier, whereas the hyper-realistic ArmA controls with delays, wobbly camera, and exaggerated endurance effects makes it feel like your soldier has brain damage from sniffing glue."

 

Liked for this one sentence lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CMBelite-FR said:

The Devs won't spend time optimizing the game as they will have to add more feature i.e. Recode and UE4 being updated means recode aswell, so heavy optimizing the game currently would be wasting time. We need to be patient, the optimization will come in beta phase where almost all the content has be added, they could then focus on optimization

I agree UE4 updates will always generate more work to be done should the updates be incorporated but realistically we should have to expect continuously accounting this well after full release, no? The only improvements I'd call superfluous would be ones that we know will be implemented down the line by UE, and talking out my unknowing behinds, I'd guess a lot of the optimization issues are Squad-specific, and thus not something we can expect an UE patch to fix... Again from my very limited experience, I was under the impression most non-third party engine games are developed first to have a stable platform in which to incorporate more features through alpha. And in this specific case, said specific features can be expected to be community generated to a large extent due to the engine and community type, meaning, should the devs focus on a platform stable for 100p combined arms, they could then pick rather quickly from a candy land of community content to incorporate into the base game as they please...

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fir3w411 said:

Serious thread turns into a joke because a mod makes it into one.

 

Great PR going on here. 

 

Not a mod, sweatheart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll make sure to remember that one. 

 

A guy posted a serious thread on real issues here and you're too full of your self to address them. 

 

You're part of the team, and the fact you reply to me on one little thing in my post, rather than what is the actual topic, shows how great you guys are at handeling things around here. 

 

Good stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are squad devs not unreal engine devs, i think they've done a hell of a job with what they have. Just hang in there man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already replied to these type of threads what seems a hundred times already. Someone who doesn't possess much knowledge about game designing/game performance etc posting things way beyond their own scope of knowledge. The devs know what they are doing. 

 

Great stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fir3w411 said:

I'll make sure to remember that one. 

 

A guy posted a serious thread on real issues here and you're too full of your self to address them. 

 

You're part of the team, and the fact you reply to me on one little thing in my post, rather than what is the actual topic, shows how great you guys are at handeling things around here. 

 

Good stuff.

 

So far you're the only one who has derailed the thread by getting offended from one reply. Instead of contributing you just bitched about one comment lol.

 

8 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

I agree UE4 updates will always generate more work to be done should the updates be incorporated but realistically we should have to expect continuously accounting this well after full release, no? The only improvements I'd call superfluous would be ones that we know will be implemented down the line by UE, and talking out my unknowing behinds, I'd guess a lot of the optimization issues are Squad-specific, and thus not something we can expect an UE patch to fix... Again from my very limited experience, I was under the impression most non-third party engine games are developed first to have a stable platform in which to incorporate more features through alpha. And in this specific case, said specific features can be expected to be community generated to a large extent due to the engine and community type, meaning, should the devs focus on a platform stable for 100p combined arms, they could then pick rather quickly from a candy land of community content to incorporate into the base game as they please...

 

I hope Offworld doesn't rely on their community to make their game for them like Bohemia Interactive, so far they haven't. I think the issues with 100p can be narrowed down to issues with how their replication is setup currently, but that's always been a hard problem to tackle in Unreal games, it can be a number of things. Either too much replication per player is going on too frequently due to the rules for each variable in place, or there are some bugs affecting replication somewhere. I'm sure they are working on it, they just implemented occlusion for replicating player movement which helped a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, looter said:

There is a big difference between clientside only, visual improvements that tax the GPU, and serverside features that affect replication which is where the sync issues stem from.

Indeed, but the dynamic foliage at least is server side AFAIK? And a further point was that clientside visual effects are maybe not the focus to be had when the base game is very unoptimized as is and lacking GFX shaders and the likes which will probably force a total re-work of certain effects like smoke anyway.

 

14 minutes ago, looter said:

The AMD performance issues stem from some issues within Unreal Engine 4 itself, and have nothing todo with Offworld. The current graphics are nowhere near as outdated looking as PR:BF2, let's not be intellectually dishonest, it only makes you look like your exaggerating on purpose.

I agree with this personally, but since I tried to bring up some general concerns (I don't even run AMD), many community members would like to see a notice/disclaimer for this before purchasing the product, and some (albeit unrealistically), demand that Offworld create their own quick fix (...yeah). Regarding the PR comparison, sure, it might be an exaggeration but the game is much closer to PR than any modern titles, and with this in mind, it is worth noting that if a project currently relatively similar to a game run on an engine from 2005 can't produce FPS rates that are playable on modern hardware, then maybe that should be priority #1...

 

14 minutes ago, looter said:

I actually like the direction the controls have been going and how they feel, I played PR for a long time and the ArmA series for over a decade, and Squad feels like a good mix between the two leaning towards a more FPS / Battlefield feel. I do agree that the delay between switching weapons is annoying, but it was in PR as well. The mic vs no-mic friction has always been in PR, I don't think that's an issue only with Squad but it would be nice to flag squads as Mic only or No Mic required with a visual icon as squad leader during creation so you don't have to waste title room.

I know some people like the controls and some don't, but a large portion of the community (myself included of course), have been complaining primarily about the camera wobble (a difficult to avoid result of real 1st person unless you want the soldier to look like he's a robot). To me and many others, it is an annoying detachment between me and my in-game character, compared to the PR responsiveness. And the squad flagging is a good idea, but mixing casual and mic only squads on the same server will still drastically mess with gameplay experience for everyone involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Melbo said:

Oh boy, my favourite type of thread!

I-it's not like that... I swear!:/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

I-it's not like that... I swear!:/

 

 

 

I know, just trust the devs, they know what they are doing :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

Indeed, but the dynamic foliage at least is server side AFAIK? And a further point was that clientside visual effects are maybe not the focus to be had when the base game is very unoptimized as is and lacking GFX shaders and the likes which will probably force a total re-work of certain effects like smoke anyway.

 

I agree with this personally, but since I tried to bring up some general concerns (I don't even run AMD), many community members would like to see a notice/disclaimer for this before purchasing the product, and some (albeit unrealistically), demand that Offworld create their own quick fix (...yeah). Regarding the PR comparison, sure, it might be an exaggeration but the game is much closer to PR than any modern titles, and with this in mind, it is worth noting that if a project currently relatively similar to a game run on an engine from 2005 can't produce FPS rates that are playable on modern hardware, then maybe that should be priority #1...

 

I know some people like the controls and some don't, but a large portion of the community (myself included of course), have been complaining primarily about the camera wobble (a difficult to avoid result of real 1st person unless you want the soldier to look like he's a robot). To me and many others, it is an annoying detachment between me and my in-game character, compared to the PR responsiveness. And the squad flagging is a good idea, but mixing casual and mic only squads on the same server will still drastically mess with gameplay experience for everyone involved.

 

Dynamic foliage shouldn't be serverside, I'm not sure how they implemented it but it should just be a collide event on simulated actors (other players) that makes the clientside foliage move based on the position when it collided, that's how we did it atleast. The variables and actors required to make it work are already replicated, so the only performance impact should be some tiny calculations when the collide events fire and some gpu work to make it happen.

 

I didn't have good FPS in BF2 until I upgraded to an 8800 GTX, and even then it'd dip. The game didn't always have great FPS for everyone, my 8600 made it crawl. It's just so old now that nearly anyone can get great performance, even with integrated chips. I agree on the headbob, I've hated it in every game I have ever played, and disable it if I can, hopefully they'll add a checkbox that lets people turn it off. I don't mind feeling like a robot, better than someone with down syndrome.

 

Hopefully when the modding SDK or whatever hits, we can load up the game and run the built-in profiling tools to help figure out where the bottlenecks are, I wouldn't mind helping with that.

Edited by looter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Melbo said:

I've already replied to these type of threads what seems a hundred times already. Someone who doesn't possess much knowledge about game designing/game performance etc posting things way beyond their own scope of knowledge. The devs know what they are doing. 

 

Great stuff.

But then the issue still persists that you're claiming things to make more customers while doing something else because 'you know more than the community'...

 

Shouldn't you guys have said "vehicles might take a long time cause UE is a clusterfudge atm", and "UE and AMD don't match atm, don't buy this game yet if you're running AMD", and "we might not make the 100p combined arms goals but maybe we will, we're working on it..."? Pre-alpha implies lack of features and glitches, not major core engine issues and the risk of never making the said end product as advertised... If there's the risk of these things involved... Then maybe let the community now, instead of having some youtuber who talked to you spread rumours about it?

 

I mean, I won't blame you for not being brutally honest, you do have bills to pay and no sane marketing would try to sell their product with the bad parts highlighted, but if the community is so ignorant of game development, why not enlighten them a bit rather than just bashing common community complaints and telling people to just shush it and go away? Just a thought...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can only wait and hope for the best, anyway i do appreciate the comment about the better movement of pr compared to hyperrealistic simulation games thats how i feel too.

 

Now please everyone stop throwing crap at each other it wont help at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, looter said:

 

Dynamic foliage shouldn't be serverside, I'm not sure how they implemented it but it should just be a collide event on simulated actors (other players) that makes the clientside foliage move based on the position when it collided, that's how we did it atleast. The variables and actors required to make it work are already replicated, so the only performance impact should be some tiny calculations when the collide events fire and some gpu work to make it happen.

 

I didn't have good FPS in BF2 until I upgraded to an 8800 GTX, and even then it'd dip. The game didn't always have great FPS for everyone, my 8600 made it crawl. It's just so old now that nearly anyone can get great performance, even with integrated chips. I agree on the headbob, I've hated it in every game I have ever played, and disable it if I can, hopefully they'll add a checkbox that lets people turn it off. I don't mind feeling like a robot, better than someone with down syndrome.

 

Hopefully when the modding SDK or whatever hits, we can load up the game and run the built-in profiling tools to help figure out where the bottlenecks are, I wouldn't mind helping with that.

First of all, great reply this should be front page FAQ cause I can't count the squad comms flooded by these worries.

 

But anyway the point with the head bob is the view point in real 1st person is based on where the soldiers head actually is down to the cm, meaning that if you want an alive looking soldier in 3rd person with a moving head you'd have to get a bit wobbly cam in 1st person. Obviously Squad and ArmA have some pretty stiff necked funny moving soldiers because watching a camera on a real head without the balance and eyeball compensation of your brain to compensate, the view would be all over the place, but to disable headbob all together the 3rd p perspective would look pretty hilarious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

Pre-alpha implies lack of features and glitches, not major core engine issues and the risk of never making the said end product as advertised.

Actually, that is exactly what it means. Pre-apha/early access is a place where you can support something you HOPE will be good some day. Developers cant hold promises on things that turn out to be impossible. You shouldnt buy unfinished products if youre not okay with that risk. (Im not just talking about Squad here and i have no reason to believe the squad devs wont fulfill all their goals.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Melbo said:

I've already replied to these type of threads what seems a hundred times already. Someone who doesn't possess much knowledge about game designing/game performance etc posting things way beyond their own scope of knowledge. The devs know what they are doing. 

 

Great stuff.

That's a pretty terrible response. You have a person being active in the community beyond playing the game (don't forget this person is a customer) who voices his concerns about the future for the game.

 

He's asking questions because he doesn't know, your little title may be "support" but the only thing you're supporting is a negative attitude.

Reply to these threads for the 101st time and talk to the guy, close the FEEDBACK forum if that's too much to handle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of these problems were simply not able to be forecasted, and only found when encountered.

 

The 100p sync issue is being addressed by the rollout of netmove. As I understand it a lot of the client-server sync issues are likely related to the common 15Hz server tickrate, and the theoretical server max is 52Hz but its pretty taxing for most hardware to achieve. As hardware accessibility improves I'm sure we'll see faster tickrate servers in the future which will yield better sync.

 

As for AMD, that really is an engine/VoIP related issue and its being addressed by all parties involved. Theres not much Squad devs can do to restructure the processor architecture for VoIP. Can they re-program the VoIP to better use existing architecture? Possibly, but I'm assuming there's a good reason that option was not chosen.

 

As for the momentum, itwas a lot heavier in the early pre-alpha implementations. I personally see no serious issues with the way characters handle, and find I am able to make my player "react" as fast as I am personally able to react, in off-guard firefights etc. This is entirely a subjective thing, and I think this game is currently much more "Arcadey" than PR:BF2 was, so I'm not sure how taking it further will help augment its "tactical" aspects.

Stamina is a pain in the ass because we don't have vehicles. Once we have vehicles it will be more reasonable. Its a good simplistic implementation of the fact that you cant Usain-Bolt everywhere with 80-100lb rucks for eternity. It adds a level of complexity that makes the game something to master; conservation of burst speed for the times you need it versus the need to get somewhere. Complexity can and often does translate to replayability and difficulty to master. This also is subjective, and I think that its only and entirely up to the developer's discretion.

 

Everything else is simply a matter of time. We are in the lackluster phase of testing. They are implementing some absolutely necessary fixes to core operation. These fixes are the foundation to the fulfillment of all future promises. We dont get a better game until these problems are solved. We are told that after these elements are implemented that the addition of assets that are being concurrently developed will be fairly rapid, so the fruit of these labors will ripen en-masse when its time.

Like most products we purchase, the amount of facets involved in the development and refinement is hard to understand until you've been there.

The reason I  backed Squad, is not because they were flawless developers with 30 years as a company of a refined workflow.

I backed Squad because the developers were passionate about what they wanted to deliver, and it was sufficiently in-line with what I wanted to play.


This is the company's first game. There were always going to be issues along the way. They have not stopped communicating these issues as they have been encountered, and they have attacked the obstacles preventing the optimal game experience relentlessly. It will take time, But I do believe that we will get the best tactical teamwork simulator nowhere else.

Its already, in my opinion, better than any other shooter in my library.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ostboll said:

Shouldn't you guys have said "vehicles might take a long time cause UE is a clusterfudge atm", and "UE and AMD don't match atm, don't buy this game yet if you're running AMD", and "we might not make the 100p combined arms goals but maybe we will, we're working on it..."? Pre-alpha implies lack of features and glitches, not major core engine issues and the risk of never making the said end product as advertised... If there's the risk of these things involved... Then maybe let the community now, instead of having some youtuber who talked to you spread rumours about it?

 

Features come when they are ready, it's impossible to put a time frame on things. I'm pretty sure the devs have always kept you guys in the loop regarding features especially with regards to vehicles and the current AMD situation.

 

It's not just Squad that is in its infancy, the engine is too so you can expect these sort of issues. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×