Jump to content

Sophiie

Members
  • Content Count

    437
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sophiie

  1. Also there's tons of actions per day that break the TOS, in public or private. If no one is offended and no one reports it, and it is not outright theft of you, another player, or LO's property, and it is also not an egregious act like cheating in an online game... while it may not be against the TOS, there is no financial reason for LO to go after those people automatically or manually. If you have a problem with toxicity ingame? Submit a ticket. Don't just post saying LO isn't 'doing their job' if you aren't showing initiative to tell them how.
  2. Hell yes! Good luck and see you guys there. For this beta it's TBD I assume. AVX-512 is needed to run the game, and it's not an easy fix to really implement non-AVX-512 override functions in appropriate places that would benefit from it without significant code work. So if they've completed it for this beta, then yes, you can use your current server-grade processor or old potato that supports AVX-512. Note that *not* using AVX is a significant performance drop in almost every case and is done on compile time. There is a solution but not one that is a quick implementation and not one you can do yourself short of replacing the hardware.
  3. Should also mention that TOS violations extend beyond hacking violations - racism, sexism, homophobia etc also are TOS violations, though often punished in less severe ways. And a lot of folks lump in 'ban' with 'suspension', especially today. Historically, ban used to not be synonymous with suspension. Additionally, a players' history with offenses is typically included in consideration with the investigation. The statement is technically correct, but may be misinterpreted by players. I suppose the part that is open to interpretation here: If you're repeatedly reporting for 'cheating' and that is found not to be true, but you are also are toxic, you are punished according to the current and prior offenses... AND repeat offenders may be subject to harsher punishment. Is that correct? Are players investigated for cheating via automated /reports also open to being investigated for other offenses they may have committed that haven't been reported, such as verbal harassment? If so, what I described would probably be a slippery slope and the exact reason why Tiggs' ban policies failed ultimately - players would get banned by 'FairFight' because it had been used to determine information about the player based on a cheat report, but ultimately players were banned for other reasons such as extreme verbal harassment that wasn't reported. Which also opened up the player to humiliation as well as discomfort knowing they would not get their account back without significant work, neither of which are acceptable treatment for consumers. My opinion on that would be: If someone 100% not detected as cheating/hacking, is being interpreted as being toxic by the CSR pulling the players' other logs... and additionally, the separate violation would not be affecting the person who reported them for cheating... They are ALSO not causing financial loss AND has not been reported for anything other than hacking. The action should then result in the player being able to get away with the TOS violation provided the TOS violation is not affecting another consumer AND is not an automated hack detection. Would LO agree with that opinion?
  4. they are trying their best, have you not been following their posts? imma take a page from the early 00's and say this: READ THE STICKIES. also i'll reiterate what i said on the unofficial discord:
  5. Remember: cheats are made by people that have an interest in hacking the game for either profit, or for their own amusement. Both require the end users of the cheat to actually have an outlet for using the cheats. If anything, the uptick in cheaters means the game is getting popular again and changes to the game are working as there are more people wanting cheats and complaining about them again. If you noticed, EAC was implemented at a time where there was a lot of hope, but no action. Now the game's had a lot of changes for the better and players are returning... hence the interest again in cheats, as some players will resort to them. I'd like to also mention something I've been saying for a long damn time: Just because someone isn't banned immediately when they have a hack running doesn't mean they will not get banned later. In fact, if you just have a big message that pops up immediately saying 'ur banned idiot' every time someone starts the game and logs in with a cheat, you can just adjust the cheat until it doesn't happen anymore. There's also the notion that some players get away with hacking because no one reports them using the ingame report system, which does flag them up for manual review, or a delayed ban in the case there's no false positives. If they aren't causing a financial loss by making someone else complain about them, they aren't worth banning until they do get reported. This not only reduces the chance of false positives, but also ensures that the right people are getting banned and that BattlEye is working correctly.
  6. If they go in with expectations that it will be broken, and are explained when they download it that it will be broken and crash a lot, they can't really say they had different expectations.
  7. Launch it! It sounds like it's in a state that people would expect for an open beta test, but I wouldn't go jumping the gun on marketing or anything too crazy yet. Let dedicated players who have spent a 6 year delay waiting for this actually get in there. Their feedback can help shape it so that when there is an actual marketing push, the game is well thought out, and has minimal bugs and issues. I'd personally be interested in taking a look into how the game performs on my system. I can understand the hesitation from the development team on pushing it out too early to make a bad impression, especially since this has been many years in the making, and the performance gains might not be final. However, the audience of people that will be testing are enthusiastic about the game... enough to where, if those performance / crash / gameplay bugs are all resolved during the testing, they will sing high praises about the current development team. That in itself could push a lot of hype on its own.
  8. Matt, check your Discord PMs when you have a chance. I've provided some extra info that may help the team.
  9. Matt, this feature is being applied to specific ARMAS pages too via the ingame browser. Just making sure you're aware.
  10. Can you please use a proper imagehost so I don't have to use Windows Sandbox to view your shitty art?
  11. Awesome! Glad to see more stuff like this. Looking forward to it.
  12. Hi Matt, First, I'd like to say thank you for providing technical insight as to why the engine upgrade is taking so long. It's long overdue and more than the folks at Reloaded Productions were willing to give out to the public. I'd like to preface what I'm about to say is largely opinion based on my experience with Reloaded, and not so much Little Orbit - I honestly haven't given the game that much of a try since you bought the game when Reloaded went under and that's largely due to the hybrid good/bad memories about the game from Reloaded's tenure with it. Let me first say that Tiggs' policies were some of the harshest in the MMO market. She policed members of the community who were unruly to begin with and those members were consistently baiting her into conversing with them. Those members of the community absolutely stopped messing with the game as soon as you introduced Easy Anti Cheat largely due to how effective EAC is as not only an anticheat, but as a spying tool on those unruly members who committed real-world crimes like calling in bomb threats. She did not deserve the harassment, but largely her actions as community manager and strict enforcement of Terms of Service ended up getting her into the generally disliked position she was in. This is not to say her policies were ineffective, but by publicly acknowledging trolls she made herself enemy #1 of the trolls. I don't blame you for taking precaution regarding protecting the rest of your staff, given that certain individuals were actively causing drama. For community management; you need the right person for the job. I can't tell you how many CMs I've seen that just take up the position, do nothing but schedule out events, communicate limited, filtered information from the development team to the public, and take a hefty salary for doing nothing of importance that you, as a CEO, can often do better and you would not need approval to release information. Whereas a community manager would often be left in the dark. As much as this community gives Tiggs a bunch of crap... Tiggs was unique in the sense that she filled multiple hats: she led the CSR team, she ran the community forums, organized two volunteer programs, and also played liason about pressing issues between the community and the development team. She was deeply ingrained into Reloaded's workflow and went above and beyond. Hell, a lot of people at Reloaded went from supporting roles to leading roles, including her. She went from managing customer support, to being the CM, and then a Producer later in the game's life. Reloaded did in fact promise a lot and not deliver. There were a lot of behind-the-scenes drama that, quite honestly, is game-industry politics at its finest. Under the guise that talking about your game would hurt the 'intellectual property' of the game, Reloaded purposefully misled the community that the engine upgrade was further along than it was. There was also the whole idea that Reloaded shouldn't allow testers not under NDA, for the sake of hiding how far along the engine upgrade was. I realize they were in financial distress (public records showed as much) but withholding information from the public and not allowing these test builds into the public hands was very snake-y, and one of the major things I disagreed with and probably the community will disagree with, too. Continuing these trends, Little Orbit has made SPCT into its own clique once again for focused, NDA-gated testing, while the rest of the general public is left in the dark, except for a weekly news update - or people poking and prodding your patcher, as the trend was before. I don't know who has you by the collar-and-chain, Matt, but you really need to push these builds out to the public as soon as possible. Give people a timeline as to when they can expect these builds. I personally do not give a damn if the build crashes on an RTX card or not. Would you agree with me that pushing out these builds to the public would be the right move here? The public was constantly dismissed as unreliable at Reloaded despite having better QA for issues than any 'compliance testing' team would. There are countless people who would provide feedback on hardware the build works on. You'd be able to judge performance over a large variety of devices. There might even be, get this, a programmer or 10 lurking in the shadows that could even diagnose these issues *for free*, and you could push out a build to fix these high-end card crash issues. The notion that an 'unfinished game' would kill the hype surrounding the engine upgrade is based on falsehood. There are plenty of games in worse states than APB: Reloaded on Steam. The average consumer is used to very poor early access builds that crash a lot. As long as you keep everything isolated to a test server - is there really any downside to doing this? I speak from experience here; gating an undisclosed game to a select number of testers and then giving it out to the public and closing the old build's servers when 'you think' a build is ready is one of the dumbest mistakes that was made in the past. In fact, I bet if the game was given to the public alongside the actual release, the game may have been up and running still, collecting revenue. When people say they don't want to be in the dark, they expect someone actually talking to them, not just posting on an outdated medium such as a forum. Mediums such as Discord, Twitter, Twitch, Facebook Live, YouTube/YouTube Gaming, etc, are all great resources and modern, especially with everyone being home and able to watch updates. Schedule out times for your development team to show off videos, livestream new things they've been working on, and even just a weekly 'vlog' from you, Matt, would do a lot to restore faith in this community beyond what you have already done. I think at one point, prior to the engine upgrade, I had to stalk your Twitter for engine upgrade news including a video of someone playing the game on a PS4 devkit that was never posted here and eventually made its way to the other mediums I listed above. Furthermore, I cannot stress this enough, people do not believe progress unless they can put their hands on their keyboard and mouse and actually *play* it. Pictures paint a good image, but playing the end result is much more believable. And based on the Engine Upgrade thread, you are closer now more than ever to putting it in the public's hands. Matt, you've already proven that you're dedicated as CEO of Little Orbit. I cannot thank you enough for going this far. As someone who was, and still is, supportive of this game, its development team, and its community, you've been a godsend in a sea of prior end-user mismanagement. It's time to let the chains off and let us see the fruits of everyone's effort - RealTime Worlds, Electronic Arts, Reloaded Games, Reloaded Productions, Reloaded Inc, Little Orbit, The Workshop, Deep Silver and the countless volunteers - that have all put their time on the line to make sure this game stays alive and fun. Let the floodgates open to 2.1's testing center. It's the only way to be 100% transparent with this community. (PS: I loved the concept of RIOT's ARG. It was a refreshing change of pace for a game that largely was regarded as boring with their content release cycle. I think the ARG was more fun than actually playing RIOT itself.)
  13. Hey Matt, Any status updates on the systems to remove JMBs entirely? Also, the Gold JMBs are missing their rates on the ARMAS page.
  14. Matt, I'd just like to say that these updates have been extremely helpful and that actually posting detailed technical explanations for issues is exactly what this community has needed for years. I know it's not your job as the CEO to communicate with the community, but I think I speak for everyone when I say that these are exceptionally well written, and I constantly link them to old Reloaded folks that I still talk to for an example of how to communicate with the community. Thank you.
  15. go review a movie then and stop posting dumb arguments on these forums
  16. So what you're saying is you can't do better - and when you can't, you call the argument that you're unable to do better completely dumb and a 'worse argument'. ok boomer
  17. Hi, If you think you can do it better, spend the near-million dollars to buy the IP rights, and hire folks to do it instead. Sincerely, A person who had to read your wall of text. PS: Unreal 3 is outdated and you shouldn't do what I just posted. Save your BjornBucks.
  18. Serious question. If all you're allowed to give is a receipt of acknowledgement on cheaters (which is completely reasonable, by the way) - then why even have internal standards on CSRs that delay ticket response times to the point where customers are waiting for more than 20 days on tickets? Back in Reloaded times, there was never a ticket queue of more than 150 per day with about triple the playerbase and judging from the forums about half the CSRs. Most of these complaints were about a players' banned accounts, lost accounts/login information scammed items (prior to the trading system) and technical support issues. In fact, by the end of a 8-hour CSR shift, there would be no more tickets and CSRs could actually get other things done. In terms of time spent on tickets, I'd say the most was on scam tickets. At most, a scam case could take up to 2-3 days to resolve - this was before trading was implemented under Little Orbit's tenure and required a lot of research. Scamming should not be handled by CSRs anymore, if they are still handling those tickets it needs to change with a secure trading system in place now. Beyond that, there wasn't really much back-and-forth between CSRs and players and for good reason. Copy and pasted responses do not allow for ambiguity between decisions you make as a CSR team. I have a serious question about this methodology: Why are you not allowing copy-pasted responses from Customer Support? There is nothing wrong with getting a pre-templated response. They didn't result in a loss of quality of the responses, the problem was largely with customers not getting the responses they wanted from customer support and that's where the majority of the complaints came from, not that they were copy and pasted - it's that the customers could not be helped. If anything, please let the customers know they can't get a response and clarify that they cannot get a response. Education of what customers can get information on is absolutely the key here, not disallowing copy and pasted responses. I mean, if you can't give someone an account's details because they can't prove that it's theirs, does it really matter if it was made by hand or a template to tell them that? Sure, it's more personal, but emotion isn't always expressed well in text. And there is plenty opportunity to be personal and courteous in instances where you can actually help a customer. I'd be extremely curious as to what lead to the decision to do this. On that subject, customer service is a bandage for a faulty product. Every time you can deal with something programmatically, you definitely should. As a customer, if you had asked me to submit a support ticket like as stated in this news post: ...I would feel extremely insulted that the issue could not be resolved by the game's developer or publisher automatically. There is no reason that people should have to submit a support ticket to get something like that. If I was in the developer/publisher's position, I would immediately rectify this by resetting the trial flags for each account affected. You have the transaction logs with third-party (and definitely first-party side) so the data is available, it's just a matter of acting on it to make good on issues like these. Matt, please consider going easier on the CSRs so that APB: Reloaded does not suffer from these CSR wait times. They do not deserve having to put in additional work to satisfy the complaints of the vocal majority forum trolls which account for 5% of all active accounts. Additionally, neither does the playerbase.
  19. Speaking of things that are 12 years old, The implementation is about 12 years old for Vivox in APB. The issue of Vivox not working has historically been a political and technical reason. It costs something like $45,000 a year for APB to run Vivox across all platforms. The SDK APB runs on is a very old version Vivox. It hasn't seen an upgrade in a number of years. Also, Vivox has to make special versions of their network topology for APB, and it's a pain in Vivox's patootie every time it breaks. Vivox has created an updated SDK but it hasn't been worth the monetary investment for Reloaded or Little Orbit to update it, as the newer SDK integrates mostly into UE4 and not UE3.5, and there's a lot of functionality changes behind the hood. So much functionality change, that it'd almost be financially not viable to dedicate a programmer making $75k/yr or more to fixing it. On top of that, there's actually cost-savings opportunities for using another service besides Vivox; or better yet removing it entirely in lieu of people making their own discord channels. Even better, Little Orbit could save $10,000-15,000 on operations cost by removing it from PC. There is very little benefit from having VOIP in APB native to the game client especially if the implementation doesn't work 90% of the time. The VOIP landscape has changed drastically with options like Discord and other gaming-focused VOIP solutions like Xbox/PS4's native party/chat system. Imagine what LO could do with it gone. They could hire 1/4th of a programmer, or 1 more community support team member. It's time to kill Vivox for good, especially on a platform where there are alternatives to it.
  20. I bet that no Developer, Community Manager, CSR lead, or CEO will post in this thread to make it appear on the developer RSS feed.
  21. This is a traditional merge, though. Names will still be conflicted, all characters effectively reside on the same server, etc. The underlying tech hasn't changed drastically, yet. Just the physical locations of the servers. Also, can we name the new server "Union"? It's a huge running gag with APB. #bringbacktheonion
  22. This is likely preparation for phasing. It's easier to phase similar-ping players into a district with similar ping than it is to match them on a world, which is currently impossible if you're an NA player playing on an EU server, for example. By having everyone on the same server, it would be very easy to figure out where people should go.
×
×
  • Create New...