Jump to content
TR97

I was excited for the potential of this game, but may have to get a refund

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I have played various simulator games and realistic shooters like World War 2 Online, Warthunder (not arcade versions), America's America 1 and 2, Red Orchestra, Insurgency, etc. I have also enjoyed a lot of other non-sim shooter games if they aren't overly arcade in their gunplay, have a larger scale, and have a high skill curve, like Planetside 2, Battlefield 2, etc.  

 

I was hopeful that Squad had finally delivered something that combined the realistic gunplay and movement of a game like RO or Insurgency, but on a scale that was more realistic like WW2OL/ARMA, and with mechanics that streamlined the game's coordination and spawning so you don't end up with the massive ratio of downtime to action that is seen in ARMA or WW2OL. 

 

Unfortunately, I am now in the position of having to decide if I want to refund the game on steam before I hit the 2 hour mark, or if I want to take a chance that these issues will be ironed out.

 

1. Technical problems. 

a) I can't use fullscreen mode without the game going black. I am forced to play in windowed mode.

b) Freelook and mouseaim are so jumpy and imprecise that it's impossible for me to aim reliably. Changing the mouse sensitivity didn't seem to fix this issue. I don't have this problem in other games. I missed out on an easy kill on a guy like 20m away who didn't even see me, only for him to turn and kill me before I got my aim squared away, after spending a long time running to the frontline from the rear, purely because I couldn't get this jumpy imprecise mouseaim on target fast enough.

c) I already had to solve another technical issue by having someone inform me that I needed to find my anticheat application and "repair" it.

 

2. Server problems. 

a) There's only a couple servers that have good ping, and I'm in the pacific northwest of the USA. 

b) The servers that do have people and have good ping, are full 24/7, and there's a line to get in. 

 

3. Gameplay problems. 

My first game highlighted all the same problems that exist with ARMA or WW2OL.

Says to select spawn. Not sure if there even are any options. Click around the map. End up spawning back at the starting base and have to run to the frontline. 

No clear indication of what the goal is, what my team is doing, or what I should be doing. No clear indication of any leadership taking place.

I run to the general area of where I know the enemy line is intersecting with ours, crouch around until I find an enemy, and die because of problems with mouse aim not working properly. 

 

I know from my experience in other games that with time I may discover this is not always the case. 

I also know that with effort I may be able to use the tools to create the leadership and teamwork that I don't currently see happening. 

 

However, the developers need to seriously reconsider how to make this all streamlined and apparent for new players if they want to grow their base. I know these issues were a common problem that held WW2OL back from retaining new players. No clear sense of direction, what are they suppose to do, where are they suppose to go, run run run, bang you're dead. Now go do it all over again, running in from the rear base, without any more clarity/direction/leadership than you had the first time. 

 

Because I've already been through all that and overcame it in other games, I'm no stranger to it in Squad.

However, in light of the technical and server issues, I find myself questioning if it's worth taking a chance that the gameplay in Squad will end up living up to my expectations of something that solves the travel time and teamplay problems in games like WW2OL or ARMA. I have to request a refund from steam before I hit the 2 hours played mark. I'm already at 1.6 hours played and maybe 90% of that time was not actually playing the game but trying to sort out technical issues at the settings screen, alt-tabbing to ask questions on forums, loading the game because it takes forever, reloading the game after restarting my computer because the game went black and my screen seemed to be frozen, and then finally waiting in queue for a server, and taking forever to load the game once I get in the server.   

If it wasn't for these technical issues, and if the servers support was there, I would probably easily overlook this bad initial experience and keep trying to figure out how it works. But by this point I'm already about done with the game for other reasons because it just doesn't want to let me play.

Edited by TR97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad is a bargain. You probably just need to tweak your computer and game settings to make it run fine. If you do decide to refund you can always try it again on free weekends in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed. While I think some of what you say has some merit (I feel, for example, that the map will still be iterated upon), I don't recognise many of the issues you say you're having. Nor do I have the same expectations that a game can simply force players to play it in the way most beneficial for all, nor do I feel that games such as Squad are especially hard to get into. How many games of this nature have a hand-holding element? It's not actually hard to pick up and play to a basic extent, and while some people are idiots, people are generally pretty good at going through the basics with you and so on. It does take a few hours to get the feel of it and so on, I acknowledge, but it would hardly be the first game in which some initial investment leads to greater benefits further on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

1 hour ago, TheRed said:

 I don't recognise many of the issues you say you're having. 

You wouldn't, because you're no longer a new player.

 

You also don't have the responsibility or burden that the developers do of needing to be able to see a game through the eyes of a new players in order to more effectively grow the playerbase.

 

I've been through this song and dance enough with other games like ARMA and WW2OL to recognize the problems right off the bat when I see it.

That's not to say I wouldn't overcome these roadblocks with some time invested in learning the game. In fact, I've already done it in other games. That's not the point of my feedback

 

As I already said, the lack of intuitiveness in the game's design would not probably dissuade me from playing it if I wasn't having so many technical issues on top of it - because I know how to learn how the game works and fit in. But do I have the incentive to do that when at first glance the gameplay appears to involve just me having to run for 10 minutes from the rear base before encountering an enemy, meanwhile my team is off doing who knows what scattered everywhere but the frontline? I know enough about these kinds of games to know that may not always be the case, but that isn't a promising start. And because of technical issues I don't have a lot of time to figure out if there is anything better the game has to offer in terms of gameplay before the time limit runs out on a refund.

 

These kinds of scenarios aren't going to make a good first impression on new players, especially those without a history in this kind of gaming such as I have. 

 

The point of the gameplay side of my feedback is to raise the red flag about how this system is seriously lacking in necessary intuitiveness, so the devs can hopefully improve upon this. If someone like me who has 15 years of milsim gaming, and gaming on similar platforms, can't just jump in and intuitively get with the program then you're missing something. And if your system can't be made very intuitive then you at the very least need some in-game coaching for players. 
 

If you don't have that in a game like this then you're going to miss out on a lot of potential new players  - especially during those free weekends. 

 

If your expectation is that people should have to learn how the game functions, and how to work with others, by fumbling around in trial and error or scouring wiki pages and forums then you're not setting yourself up for success. There's no excuse for not having an intuitive system or at the very least some in-game coaching - ideally both, if you really care about doing things right. 

 

The best way to figure out what you need to do is by plopping various people of different gaming backgrounds in front of your game and seeing what happens. They'll blow your pride out of the water pretty quick if you have any about how intuitive and great your system is. But if you can redesign the systems so even they can jump right in and understand what's going on then you've got a winner.  If you think you don't need a system that intuitive to maximize success then that's an even worse pride problem. 

Even worse would be recognizing you have a problem, but taking the lazy way out and convincing yourself it can't be made intuitive so let's just hope enough players are willing to struggle through it to get hooked. Not a winning strategy, and not a necessary approach to take either.

 

 

Edited by TR97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

for the technical problems:

- try to get support in the Troubleshooting Forum but for most of us it runs without those Problems you described (most of the time) which seem game Breaking to me. FIX that before you get any further.

 

regarding Server Problems:

- there are a lot Servers in the US and those who are 24/7 full are full due to a reason. Take your time to get onto one of those. There are active Admins and ppl with alot of experience playing there who can help you. Just say you are new and they probably take you by the Hand. Although you might end up doing Logi runs :) (which still is k so you can learn this side too)

 

Gameplay Problems:

when you got your game running and got onto a decent server you will learn the game basics pretty fast  i think and will change some points of view from yours. Community is helpful, give them a chance to explain in game and yourself to learn by just doing.  UI is a little bit overloaded since some versions but you will get used to it.

Actually if you dont really want to really get into the game and it's mechanics, you dont even need to read a single page of Wiki.

It is much easier to learn than any ARMA mod. Not to master though.

 

5 hours ago, TR97 said:

But if you can redesign the systems so even they can jump right in and understand what's going on then you've got a winner.  If you think you don't need a system that intuitive to maximize success then that's an even worse pride problem. 

Actually if you let them atleast hop in with a experienced SL this could be a lot of fun for all. Besides … can you think of a Triple A game where there is no Tutorial? Where you just hop in and know everything from the start?

Most of those games have Tutorials for each part of the game to lead you into and when you are finished you are still "bad" at the game.

This sadly isnt a Triple A game from financial perspective.

 

Ofc some mechanics are not set in stone or subject to change and not everything is perfect. 

So if you could come up with an idea how to make things more intuitive maybe it gets implemented.

 

 

 

 

Edited by gshAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TR97 said:

 

You wouldn't, because you're no longer a new player.

 

You also don't have the responsibility or burden that the developers do of needing to be able to see a game through the eyes of a new players in order to more effectively grow the playerbase.

 

I've been through this song and dance enough with other games like ARMA and WW2OL to recognize the problems right off the bat when I see it.

That's not to say I wouldn't overcome these roadblocks with some time invested in learning the game. In fact, I've already done it in other games. That's not the point of my feedback

 

As I already said, the lack of intuitiveness in the game's design would not probably dissuade me from playing it if I wasn't having so many technical issues on top of it - because I know how to learn how the game works and fit in. But do I have the incentive to do that when at first glance the gameplay appears to involve just me having to run for 10 minutes from the rear base before encountering an enemy, meanwhile my team is off doing who knows what scattered everywhere but the frontline? I know enough about these kinds of games to know that may not always be the case, but that isn't a promising start. And because of technical issues I don't have a lot of time to figure out if there is anything better the game has to offer in terms of gameplay before the time limit runs out on a refund.

 

These kinds of scenarios aren't going to make a good first impression on new players, especially those without a history in this kind of gaming such as I have. 

 

The point of the gameplay side of my feedback is to raise the red flag about how this system is seriously lacking in necessary intuitiveness, so the devs can hopefully improve upon this. If someone like me who has 15 years of milsim gaming, and gaming on similar platforms, can't just jump in and intuitively get with the program then you're missing something. And if your system can't be made very intuitive then you at the very least need some in-game coaching for players. 
 

If you don't have that in a game like this then you're going to miss out on a lot of potential new players  - especially during those free weekends. 

 

If your expectation is that people should have to learn how the game functions, and how to work with others, by fumbling around in trial and error or scouring wiki pages and forums then you're not setting yourself up for success. There's no excuse for not having an intuitive system or at the very least some in-game coaching - ideally both, if you really care about doing things right. 

 

The best way to figure out what you need to do is by plopping various people of different gaming backgrounds in front of your game and seeing what happens. They'll blow your pride out of the water pretty quick if you have any about how intuitive and great your system is. But if you can redesign the systems so even they can jump right in and understand what's going on then you've got a winner.  If you think you don't need a system that intuitive to maximize success then that's an even worse pride problem. 

Even worse would be recognizing you have a problem, but taking the lazy way out and convincing yourself it can't be made intuitive so let's just hope enough players are willing to struggle through it to get hooked. Not a winning strategy, and not a necessary approach to take either.

 

 

You seem to be well informed about the dynamic relationship between game mechanics and gui design. Maybe in your opinion there's an example of a game within the same genre that you feel is the benchmark for this paradigm then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, gshAT said:

 

Gameplay Problems:

when you got your game running and got onto a decent server you will learn the game basics pretty fast  i think and will change some points of view from yours. Community is helpful, give them a chance to explain in game and yourself to learn by just doing. 

I don't doubt that my experience would improve if I played more and I'd get come to understand the quirks of how this game and it's UI works - but that's not the issue.

The issue is can you plop a new free weekend player into the seat of this game and expect them to be able to play it (not master it, but at least get into it) without another player explaining it to them or after many hours of trial and error?

 

Quote

 


Besides … can you think of a Triple A game where there is no Tutorial?

 

 

An in-game tutorial would be a good start. It's the most basic thing you can do - but Squad doesn't even have that.

 

 

Quote

Where you just hop in and know everything from the start?

 

 

You misunderstood what I was suggesting if you thought I said the interface had to be so intuitive that no guidance was needed via tutorials or pop-up aids. 

 

However, the more intuitive you design your UI the less heavy your in-game tutorialization of the game will have to be to get people up and running.

 

 

Quote

This sadly isnt a Triple A game from financial perspective.

 

It doesn't take Triple A finances to design a good UI and throw in some tutorial chat bubbles that guide a player through what it all is the first time they load up your game. Most budget indie games these days manage that much. 

 

 

Edited by TR97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't disagree that there's no harm in making things as intuitive as possible, nor do I think you're around about the potential benefits of an optional tutorial or 'briefing'. Linking to videos or having vague explanations on loading screens clearly isn't as accessible or comprehensive. I know you may say that this is a weak point in the days of extended early access where many buyers have already jumped in, but it's worth noting that this remains an unfinished game. Tutorials etc would often be developed late on in the cycle, so perhaps one will come.  This isn't apologist; this remains a legitimate point, and as above,  I acknowledge that long periods of early access and widespread purchasing / free weekends perhaps mean this would ideally be pushed forward. 

 

Your arguments have been considered rather than just moaning [refreshing], so I hope you stay around and invest. I think you may have been a little over critical, personally, given that Squad hardly stands alone in being somewhat opaque in certain regards at the first moment - I don't recall PS2 being overly obvious, for example - or in being somewhat dependent on players for the best experience. I also still genuinely don't and never did see *some* of your issues,  and in the wider sense perhaps I'm simply someone who isn't put off by not knowing  much at first. Yet I accept that new player perspectives are important and hope the vocal established community doesn't forget that,  regardless of their own view. I hope you are able to overcome your current hurdles, as I believe you will judge this rather differently with the benefit of some time... no matter how bumpy your induction! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, TR97 said:

The issue is can you plop a new free weekend player into the seat of this game and expect them to be able to play it

never expect anything. Always assume the worst!

And with a willing SL a new Player should have a decent experience (at least from the perspective of learing the game basics). It is a community driven game. And let them finish the game before introducing tutorials.

 

last time on a free weekend i think i remember that there was a note right on the starting screen (actually left) which recommended what you should do before getting into game. I think they linked to some starting guides and also the wiki. even some Video guides if i recall correctly. Not too sure though. Right now you got some changelogs.

Edited by gshAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he has some kind of point on the tutorial. For the majority I don't think it's been an issue at all: I was happy without, many, many others are - but it wouldn't be a bad thing if done well, and as for timing, where it's in early access for so long, so many of the core audience have already bought it that there's a risk of losing players in that phase. I know purchases have been strong and there is certainly a good core playerbase, but I guess it has arguably been a crucial period to engage as many players as possible, rather than risk losing any who would, for the want of a gentle, tutorially prod, have engaged fully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

agreed.

Right now on the starting screens are only changelogs.

Maybe they could at least gather up some essential Info even if it is community Content. There are a lot of great starting guides out there. written and on YouTube. (Like i think i recall that they are already doing this on free weekends)

This definitley could help newer Players and would be at least for now a Workaround to an actual Tutorial

Edited by gshAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think they have linked to videos in the past etc. - which would have been useful. I think OP has a point that for many, this simply wouldn't be engaged with. Clearly, it should be, but actually, we all know that people take the path of least resistance as a rule. Maybe a very brief playable thing wouldn't be too hard to put together in the short term - a placeholder for now that at least explains basic roles, weapon handling, game mechanics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TR97 said:

An in-game tutorial would be a good start. It's the most basic thing you can do - but Squad doesn't even have that.

I mean, Squad really doesn't need that, new players joining in for the first time only really need to know how their gun works, and have a good mindset in terms of being willing to go along with the Squad leaders. The gameplay of Squad in general is incredibly simple for new players, unless they start trying out more advanced classes, or try to squad lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TR97 said:

I don't doubt that my experience would improve if I played more and I'd get come to understand the quirks of how this game and it's UI works - but that's not the issue.

The issue is can you plop a new free weekend player into the seat of this game and expect them to be able to play it (not master it, but at least get into it) without another player explaining it to them or after many hours of trial and error?

 

 

An in-game tutorial would be a good start. It's the most basic thing you can do - but Squad doesn't even have that.

 

 

 

 

You misunderstood what I was suggesting if you thought I said the interface had to be so intuitive that no guidance was needed via tutorials or pop-up aids. 

 

However, the more intuitive you design your UI the less heavy your in-game tutorialization of the game will have to be to get people up and running.

 

 

 

It doesn't take Triple A finances to design a good UI and throw in some tutorial chat bubbles that guide a player through what it all is the first time they load up your game. Most budget indie games these days manage that much. 

 

 

For somebody that professes to have previously spent a great deal of time playing games within the same genre and yet have never even heard of Squad plus only just now discovered it with less than 2 hours of playtime you seemingly have an intimate and almost uncanny knowledge of what the game isn't...

 

Sounds a bit off putting to most of us because the game itself is so simple and intuitive that young children can and do play it with a great deal of proficiency.

 

Get your refund and maybe try it again later on a free weekend when you could spend more unrestricted time checking it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TR97 said:

3. Gameplay problems. 

My first game highlighted all the same problems that exist with ARMA or WW2OL.

Says to select spawn. Not sure if there even are any options. Click around the map. End up spawning back at the starting base and have to run to the frontline. 

No clear indication of what the goal is, what my team is doing, or what I should be doing. No clear indication of any leadership taking place.

I run to the general area of where I know the enemy line is intersecting with ours, crouch around until I find an enemy, and die because of problems with mouse aim not working properly. 

 

Technical problems aside....

 

http://bfy.tw/LeUw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2019 at 2:32 PM, TR97 said:

3. Gameplay problems. 

My first game highlighted all the same problems that exist with ARMA or WW2OL.

Says to select spawn. Not sure if there even are any options. Click around the map. End up spawning back at the starting base and have to run to the frontline. 

No clear indication of what the goal is, what my team is doing, or what I should be doing. No clear indication of any leadership taking place.

I run to the general area of where I know the enemy line is intersecting with ours, crouch around until I find an enemy, and die because of problems with mouse aim not working properly. 

 

I know from my experience in other games that with time I may discover this is not always the case. 

I also know that with effort I may be able to use the tools to create the leadership and teamwork that I don't currently see happening. 

 

However, the developers need to seriously reconsider how to make this all streamlined and apparent for new players if they want to grow their base. I know these issues were a common problem that held WW2OL back from retaining new players. No clear sense of direction, what are they suppose to do, where are they suppose to go, run run run, bang you're dead. Now go do it all over again, running in from the rear base, without any more clarity/direction/leadership than you had the first time.

I'm really disappointed.

xFPQGMW.png

The UI very clearly says what the match is about and the little question mark tooltips at the top tell you what everything means.

I would prefer they use the old loading image that couldn't tell you in any larger text about the objectives but they probably figured it's shown enough times to tell you what's going on.

There's a little dropdown of all available spawns that you would have seen too.

For the majority of the community, you'd have no issue finding someone in any squad who will tell you what you need to do.

 

There's an old lesson I learned from playing through Half Life 2's developer commentary years ago that stuck with me.

In Episode 2's underground area, one of them explained that the level had to be dumbed down considerably because too many people would go around in circles and get confused without a clear indicator of where they needed to go. All they needed to do was go a different direction instead of running in circles.

There's a limit to how extreme the handholding should be in a game. There's enough information in Squad to give you the most basic information to live off of and that's how it should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It sounds like you’re giving up without really giving the game a try. Like ppl have suggested, fix your tech issues by posting on this forum or contacting tech support, and then join a good server with decent squad leads who will teach you the ropes. That’s all you can really do because even if the devs decide to redesign the UI and add a tutorial (they probably won’t do this, though), it will take months to get implemented.

Edited by fatalsushi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback TR97!!

 

Yes indeed new player UX needs alot of work, we're going to be tackling that much more once all the core systems are in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TR97, thank you for posting your thoughts on Squad.

I wholeheartedly agree with every point.
Out of experience I know, that troubleshooting the manifold quirks of Squad can be very time-consuming.

In short, I fully understand why you will refund the game.


Also, whoever in this forum/community thinks "Squad is intuitive" suffers from tunnel vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TR97

 

I agree with everything you said.

 

The technical issues are transient and I assume (hope) they are addressed before the game releases out of early access.

 

The new player UX needs a lot of work. Once you get past those early barriers, it's got *tons* of potential and is, imo, just starting to come together as a game. Keep in mind the game is still in active development. I hope that over the next 6 months the team focuses on polish, optimization and new player retention as much - if not more - than adding new content.

 

I was a private beta tester for WW2OL. I ran what was considered to be the most useful new player resource for that game (a small website). I really wanted that game to "work". It never did. I realize it is still "alive" today, but when they launched that game I was like "omg, this game is at least 18 months from being a feasible public beta". It never recovered from a disastrous launch on top of a partially finished game built on an engine that was never going to have the technical capabilities the vision required.

 

Quite the opposite is true with Squad. The Steam early access program is brilliant (if not abused by cash hungry developers). The team has much inspiration in tried and tested game design from Project Reality. The Unreal Engine is a very capable game engine which technically can accomplish the vision the team has for Squad. 

 

It will take time. And, as you say, considerable effort put into the new player experience. Your first 5 minutes, 50 minutes, 5 hours, 50 hours are "milestones" along the way. My guess would be that Squad sees a lot of attrition at the <5 hour mark.

 

egg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive got Red Orchestra and played a lot of insurgency, they dont particularly hold the hand of the new player either, infact they can be even tougher due to the one shot kill and the faster pace.  the game is not that hard to pick up, look on the internet there are plenty of resources, but it could do with a short instructional training session,  granted.  Im with you on the UI I think it was not a change for the better but sure there are many players out there that like it.

 

Technical issues seem to be player specific, I have a potato computer and the only issue I ever have with the game is the fact it stops loading on the round entry screen because I switch windows (dual screen), annoying but sporadic.     Painful if you have purchased a game to play and you always want your issue addressed vs the bigger picture, having the ability to refund helps and come back at a later date. 

 

The gameplay problem you describe regarding the spawn is a problem for all players not just new ones, its a pia and needs sorted, Ive got more hours than I should in the game and still find myself back at main when Ive never selected main. 

 

One thing however regarding gameplay, it sounds like you pretty much soloing .. (may not be the case but thats how it reads) and tbh your not going to have a great time of it as a new player, especially if you have played games like insurgency and red orchestra, they tend to be a spawn rush die mass brawl of individuals.     Your instructions and objectives should be set by your squad lead, and if your on a good server other squad members should be willing to help you out.   It makes for a painful game if your SL doesnt speak or you solo so would suggest a) dont solo b) leave a squad if the SL is not talking.

 

I had the same issues with Post Scriptum and refunded that 3 times! Its improved greatly and now playing it more than squad these days.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/6/2019 at 2:30 AM, TheRed said:

I know you may say that this is a weak point in the days of extended early access where many buyers have already jumped in, but it's worth noting that this remains an unfinished game. Tutorials etc would often be developed late on in the cycle, so perhaps one will come.  

On 1/6/2019 at 2:11 PM, Thegreenzzz said:

One word, alpha

That doesn't work as an excuse when the devs put development resources into a second game (post scriptum) while their first game is still technically in early release phase after 3 years.

 

I don't fault them for trying to inject some more cash into their company with a new release, but let's not pretend Squad still deserves to have the early access excuse by this point for failing to have certain basic necessities taken care of. 

 

On 1/6/2019 at 3:56 AM, gshAT said:

never expect anything. Always assume the worst!

That is true. A big problem with game and UI design is people assume too much from familiarity with the system. It's hard to anticipate what people are going to get hung up on without testing it by throwing random people in front of it and seeing what happens.

 

Quote

And with a willing SL a new Player should have a decent experience (at least from the perspective of learing the game basics). It is a community driven game.

On 1/7/2019 at 2:04 AM, fatalsushi said:

 then join a good server with decent squad leads who will teach you the ropes.

On 1/7/2019 at 12:54 AM, Rybec said:

 

For the majority of the community, you'd have no issue finding someone in any squad who will tell you what you need to do.

 

 

You cannot expect to lean on the community as a crutch for a lack of a sufficiently intuitive interface and game design. This reflects a mistake that was made on WW2OL. It's dangerous to let the community be a crutch for a lack of development put into giving new players a smooth introduction into the game. "let them join a squad, then the squad can teach them the ropes". It never worked. Which is why they had such an abysmal turnover rate of free trial players to paying players. 

 

Quote

And let them finish the game before introducing tutorials.

 

That would be another mistake you don't want to repeat from WW2OL. There's always more to do. If you don't make it an easy transition for new players to get to hooked you may never get around to finishing the game, or it will actually take longer due to not having as much income. 

 

Quote

last time on a free weekend

i think i remember that there was a note right on the starting screen (actually left) which recommended what you should do before getting into game. I think they linked to some starting guides and also the wiki. even some Video guides if i recall correctly. Not too sure though. Right now you got some changelogs.

 

This shows an acknowledgement that they know there is a real problem. But linking some out of game videos and wiki pages is not an effective way to deal with the problem. 

 

On 1/6/2019 at 4:27 AM, Guan_Yu007 said:

I mean, Squad really doesn't need that, new players joining in for the first time only really need to know how their gun works, and have a good mindset in terms of being willing to go along with the Squad leaders. The gameplay of Squad in general is incredibly simple for new players, unless they start trying out more advanced classes, or try to squad lead.

The fact that you believe this, demonstrates why raising the red flag for some of you was necessary. 

 

It's downright delusion to think the only thing you need to know for success in Squad is how to fire your gun. 

 

That level of knowledge will not result in a satisfying game experience. The experience I described to you is what most will face. And they won't all have the patience to slog it out because they are convinced there's a gem of a game waiting behind it all.

 

On 1/6/2019 at 7:24 AM, Jevski said:

 

Technical problems aside....

 

http://bfy.tw/LeUw

 

That's exactly the problem. If you expect players to have to turn to online searching and wikis to figure out how the game is suppose to work then you're going to lose a lot of potential players. 

 

The old maxim of successful game development is "easy to get into but difficult to master".

 

On 1/7/2019 at 12:54 AM, Rybec said:

I'm really disappointed.

...

The UI very clearly says

....

There's enough information in Squad to give you the most basic information to live off of and that's how it should be.

 

You fall under the category of those I mentioned who would need a rude awakening about how intuitive the game really is by actually watching random people try it for the first time. 

 

Blaming the players for not being able to figure out the UI doesn't put money in the bank of the developers. 

Fixing the UI and mechanics to quickly integrate and grab the fascination of new players does. 

 

On 1/7/2019 at 2:04 AM, fatalsushi said:

It sounds like you’re giving up without really giving the game a try. Like ppl have suggested, fix your tech issues by posting on this forum or contacting tech support,... 

Posting about the tech issues on two forums I've got no solutions yet.

 

If that weren't an issue, the lack of good servers is a big problem. I've got a couple servers to choose from and I'm expected to wait in line everytime I want to play the game. Maybe they need some quality official servers spaced around the country to address this shortage.

 

Both of those get in the way of being able to evaluate the game, and at this point it's hard to tell if the game would really live up to expectations once I put in the time to learn it. 

 

It's a catch 22. Take a chance the server/tech issues sort out but then maybe the game really ends up being unsatisfactory anyway. If I already knew the game was awesome from my limited experience then I'd be far more willing to take my chances with the tech/server issues. But when they all converge together the game looks increasingly like a $40 risk not worth taking.

 

Quote

That’s all you can really do because even if the devs decide to redesign the UI and add a tutorial (they probably won’t do this, though), it will take months to get implemented.

 

From experience in WW2OL, I'd say that should be your priority. If you can attract new blood to the game then you'll get an uptick in finances that will let you speed up development. If you have trouble converting players due to the inconsistency and opaqueness of the game, then you'll always be trying to play catch up and never will get around to actually bringing clarity and consistency to the player experience. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TR97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TR97 said:

That doesn't work as an excuse when the devs put development resources into a second game (post scriptum) while their first game is still technically in early release phase after 3 years.

 

I don't fault them for trying to inject some more cash into their company with a new release, but let's not pretend Squad still deserves to have the early access excuse by this point for failing to have certain basic necessities taken care of. 

OWI put little to no resources into developing Post Scriptum, as it is not their game. Post scriptum is made by Periscope games, a completely separate entity. The guys at periscope games were originally modders, making a WW2 mod for Squad, but then decided they wanted to make it a complete standalone title - A deal was made between OWI & Periscope, to give access to the full Squad framework to Periscope games, to allow them to use OWI/Squads core systems to build their game. OWI was only the publishing company for PS.

There's a priority ladder, some thing just sit lower than others. It's how development works. EA excuse is still valid for OWI, it's not like Squad is like the 90% of EA games that come out broken, then every patch after breaks the game more. OWI take their time, and give quality over quantity - The old school way of developing games. Not the new school way of cash grabs, and spewing as much broken patches out as possible.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×