LAG LAG AND MORE LAG

[Techno raze]

Since last update there has been far too much lag in the DZ to enable an enjoyable experience.

Many friends have the same issue which is why we're back to battlefield 4 until a fix or until battlefield one arrives.

 

[Brownsjunky]

I have had the same issue but with matchmaking. Dailies underground. Seems jumpy. Thought was my internet. It's not all the time but seems to have been in the last week or so

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

Maybe they're cutting the number of dedicated servers due to decline in the number of players. 

 

[g1nt3r]

Maybe they're cutting the number of dedicated servers due to decline in the number of players. 

Declining player base? This true?

 

[Kaliber]

I think there's always been lag in this game, DZ or otherwise. That's why when you headshot an AI it takes one full second for them to drop and for the server to register you just shot them in the face. I have a 100 meg connection over wifi so drop that to about half and then through PSN its a stable 28megs give or take. There shouldn't be lag at all but there is, Ubisoft needs to do better. If you want an online only game to compete with the others than make it work accordingly.

 

[who-dat]

Declining player base? This true?

I can attest to it. Only a few, if any, on my friends list play the division anymore. Personally, I have the season pass, and haven't even played UG yet....

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

Declining player base? This true?

I'm just tossing out a plausible reason.  Like @who-dat, many of my friends are playing other games, basically all of us on PS4 in my clan are on NMS.  RAR and Into the Dark Zone crews shut down their podcasts because they don't play the game as much.  DZR, while still going strong, is branching out to cover other games because some of their members seem to be losing interest.  Oh, and I don't think PC ever recovered after their 90%+ drop in players because of the cheating.  

I haven't found anything on decline player count (aside from the Steam numbers for PC), but if the game is dropping in popularity I wouldn't think they'd broadcast that.  If people see the game is hemorrhaging players, they might lose people faster as people think it won't be worth their time to play a game that's dying.  

It would look pretty bad if the player counts truly are tanking on what was the most popular new franchise game release and what was going to be the next Ubi franchise.  Hard to fix your image if you manage to burn all that capital they had at the start. Failures like that can lose people their jobs and close studios when they're "restructured".  

Like I said, nothing concrete, just a guess.  

 

[Big Grumper]

I'm just tossing out a plausible reason.  Like @who-dat, many of my friends are playing other games, basically all of us on PS4 in my clan are on NMS.  RAR and Into the Dark Zone crews shut down their podcasts because they don't play the game as much.  DZR, while still going strong, is branching out to cover other games because some of their members seem to be losing interest.  Oh, and I don't think PC ever recovered after their 90%+ drop in players because of the cheating.  

I haven't found anything on decline player count (aside from the Steam numbers for PC), but if the game is dropping in popularity I wouldn't think they'd broadcast that.  If people see the game is hemorrhaging players, they might lose people faster as people think it won't be worth their time to play a game that's dying.  

It would look pretty bad if the player counts truly are tanking on what was the most popular new franchise game release and what was going to be the next Ubi franchise.  Hard to fix your image if you manage to burn all that capital they had at the start. Failures like that can lose people their jobs and close studios when they're "restructured".  

Like I said, nothing concrete, just a guess.  

Did anybody catch last week's State of the Nation podcast (or whatever it's called) with Hamish? It was unusually honest from a developer where he and the other fella - Yannick? - pretty much admitted that the game is broken in almost every area. 

Although he didn't explicitly refer to it, the drop in numbers was alluded to.

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

I don't listen to SotG, used to get that info from RAR.  I might have to give it a listen or read the transcript.  

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

Did anybody catch last week's State of the Nation podcast (or whatever it's called) with Hamish? It was unusually honest from a developer where he and the other fella - Yannick? - pretty much admitted that the game is broken in almost every area. 

Although he didn't explicitly refer to it, the drop in numbers was alluded to.

Here's an article referencing this:

https://www.google.com/amp/www.itechpost.com/amp/articles/25429/20160824/tom-clancys-the-division-nearing-its-end-tom-clancys-the-division-nearing-its-end-constant-server-shut-down-tom-clancys-the-division-server-tom-clancys-the-division-server-shut-down.htm?client=safari

And here's one with a link to Arreks video summary of the SotG:

http://www.technewstoday.com/31099-the-division-ubisoft-massive-admits-game-is-in-broken-state/

So, is the writing on the wall?

 

[Big Grumper]

This is Skill-Up's optimistic response to it. 

 

[supercat]

Errrr.... yeah, actually it's getting slower to do matchmaking on ps4. Although that also could mean most players are playing Underground or simply gave the game up. How's the latest update from Steam statistic, though?

I haven't been playing with my team simply because it's not rewarding. Even the guy who always psyched up when playing this game in the end said his final words, as I quote, "It's boring. It is boring, right?". To which I replied, "Yes. It is boring. Everyday we do the same without any actual result and progression."

Btw, you don't need to listen to SOTG lol. They everytime say they acknowledge the problems and are "looking into it". It's like listening to cassette tape over and over again. 

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

Yeah, all of the articles I've read say that they acknowledge there are multiple problems, that they're not sure how to fix all of them, and basically they don't have a true path to fix the broken that is the Division.  

 

[quinch1199]

Yeah, all of the articles I've read say that they acknowledge there are multiple problems, that they're not sure how to fix all of them, and basically they don't have a true path to fix the broken that is the Division.  

Perhaps it will be damage control until Wildlands is released? Then they can either slowly let it slide away or completely revamp it like Destiny did with itself at the start of the year.

Still, they can take pride in the fact they managed to do better and last longer than Star Wars Battlefront! 

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

I think the game was an ambitious project that just failed in execution.  Part of the problem is that if I remember right Ubi had them start from scratch once or twice and even with the final product they didn't really provide what they promised.  

Then they managed to alienate the players on all platforms by different means:

XB1 players had glitches that other players didn't namely the one that disappeared their characters for a week or so which basically made it so they couldn't play the game since if they started a new toon it would be deleted when their acct was reset to restore their original toon.

PC, glitchers and hackers.  They felt adding PC to the "exclusive" early release of the first 2 DLC would help but by the time that dropped over 90% of the PC base had dropped the game because it was all but unplayable unless you were hacking and glitching.  

PS4, we got to be the bastsard stepchildren.  I understand one console getting exclusive rights on content is a way to sell consoles.  I think it's crap and don't agree with it, but I understand.  At least PS4 players didn't have to wait a year for the first two DLC that were XB1 first.   Then when Massive gave them to PC players at the same time because they had a broken game, it went from XB1 exclusive to PS4 being punished.

Basically, I still like the game and will probably play it on and off until Wildlands comes out.  I don't care to deal with he bullshit that is the DZ, so I'll stick to the rest of the content.  Also, with the exception of completing each incursion once (still need to do Dragon's Nest), I'll probably never play them again because they just don't interest me.  So, it's unfortunate that I'm left with a game that I won't use 2 big parts of, but there's still some enjoyment to be had. 

 

[quinch1199]

I personally have really enjoyed the game, the concept, setting and broad gameplay aspects were brilliant. However, I feel it suffered in development from not really knowing exactly WHAT game they were attempting to achieve. In the end they've managed to make pretty good PvE content BUT really poor PvP content...which...they have also chosen to affect the PvE aspects negatively. In an attempt to make PvP not only accessible to even more casual gamers but to ensure the same balancing within the PvP is applicable in PvE... they've really made a mistake. 

I'm still perplexed at the choice to do this. There seems no business gain from ensuring PvP is "balanced" with PvE and it certainly something that's backfired as they've been forced to spend resources on aspects of the game that should have been fine and complete very soon after release. 

For a company with such experience to think they believed the PvP side would be anything other than a Meta-Race seems absurd to me. Yet, here they are STILL trying to force players away from hunting and using the ultimate Meta-game gear by "rebalancing" gear and weapons ... WORSE though ... they then carry this through to PvE which is an enclosed environment! 

We still officially have TWO major paid DLC's to receive don't we? I really wonder what effort now will be made to polish them ... at this stage even I haven't played in a while and like others above I have no one on my Steam friends list playing apart from a few forum friends here. I'm not playing mainly as a work shift has me pretty much exhausted at night and I don't want a more complex game to play like Division BUT...I've not missed it AND I don't feel the excitement I once did to play. 

ALL THIS could have been avoided with clearer ideas about the game at the start. To build a dedicated MMORPG with third person, cover based combat mechanics and both PvE and PvP aspects ... on the face of it seems an easy remit and it would have been had they learnt from mistakes from other developers and titles have have since had to go F2P in order to continue. 

Clear concise changes to models that have been proven to WORK in other titles:

1) PvP and PvE are separate environments! Changes in one do NOT effect the other.

2) PvP is an ARENA MODE where stats are equalised, talents and skills are usable but capped to ensure even and fair gameplay.

3) PvE environment is LARGE with multiple quests of varying types where the rewards are clear and ALWAYS progressive (i.e. not up to the Gods of RNG), multiple quest givers and a strong crafting tree.

4) PvP rewards are ultimately the BEST. Named sets / limited items etc BUT always add to your level and progression to ensure you are always matched against players of equal level.

5) PvP matchmaker is stable and clear in meaning and intent. 

6) Rewards from PvP are UNCAPPED outside of the Arena area ... hence their importance to be able to progress within the PvE environments easier. +

The fact they made the PvE area reatively smaller than it should be for any longevity within a PvE environment indicates that they either VASTLY underestimated the interest in PvP or never intended the game to be played for extended periods. Both options don't make sense in context with a development house of such experience.

In fact, I'm actually considering how much BETTER and well received the game would have been WITHOUT any PvP.

...think about it....

No Dark Zone at all but all PvE. Massive could concentrate on building and EXPANDING the PvE area's at a much faster pace, be able to address bugs, glitches, hacks etc better and faster as well without having to address any knock on PvP aspects. I see in this game a really solid, enjoyable and unique PvE game ... but it lacks longevity ... because too much focus was put on a useless PvP sub-game that has only managed to drag down the reputation of the game, suck resources from the developer and negatively effect the PvE experience directly!

 

[quinch1199]

I'll add a few other concepts that would have helped if they'd been adopted:

7) Environments change and are influenced by player actions. If you complete all the quests in an area the area physically and visibly changes (aka Homefront: Revolution / Mad Max) they get cleaner (no dead bodies lying around!), shops open again and new environmental options open such as vanity vendors with more options. Currently all that happens is that mobs get less.

8) Environments can change both ways! Neglect an area and mobs return, areas revert and you lose the extra facilities if you fail to complete (achievable) daily & weekly quests.. this happens in REAL time (like Nintendo's 3DS game Animal Crossing). If you log out for a week you will come back and have to "cut the grass" again, complete daily tasks and deal with mobs who've moved in. This is all to promote replayability. 

9) Specialisation options - Skill trees cost XP to unlock and changing your specialisation costs XP. This may sound harsh but... why have multiple characters in a game if ONE character can, alternately, be able to perform all tasks by just swapping gear? Especially with such a basic character creation menu. There's no NEW experience gained by building other characters. 

 

[DeadSockPuppet]

I agree with the points @quinch1199 put up, except for #9.  I like that you can level up one character and then swap gear for different roles.  For casuals like me, it can take time to get a second character to end-game and not everyone wants to do that when they can be grinding gear for a main.  

I do have a second toon, but I didn't build her until I had basically harvested her gear by grinding my main.  And I did power level her, so I guess it didn't take as long as it could have, but it still took basically one of my weeks of gaming to get her leveled (I only played about 8-10hrs/week).

However, I think the other points raised are great and they're all changes that I think the game would benefit from.  However, as @quinch1199 mentioned, how much polish is the game and 2 remaining DLCs going to get if the players aren't there.  I'm guessing the DLC is basically built and will probably be released "as-is" unless they find a miraculous cure for the the game's ails and they're able to pull players back in.  

With a new installment in a proven franchise dropping in about 6 months, do we think any of the above will happen?

 

[quinch1199]

@DeadSockPuppet Last nights announcement that the next DLC is being delayed and work with the next patch is PURELY to be on fixing the core game is both interesting and a little worrying from my point of view.  Its a brave choice...especially as we've paid already for this DLC and it's something that could extend playability within the game but I'm interested to find out exactly how and what fixes they're working on as I can only envisage complete mechanics overhauls such as I've suggested above to keep a majority of players online in the game. 

No date that I have heard for the DLC either ... even the next patch seems to be put back to October now, and that's the "fix core game" patch.

 

[quinch1199]

except for #9.  I like that you can level up one character and then swap gear for different roles.  For casuals like me, it can take time to get a second character to end-game and not everyone wants to do that when they can be grinding gear for a main

Perhaps reducing character slots (free ones) to two BUT significantly increasing the creation tools (up to Fallout/Skyrim) levels? I'm still not sure why there are four slots.