16 replies to this topic

[Taron]

... fix all of those bugs first!

We really do not need new features untill all the bugs of the game - and there are a lot! - are gone. So please, do not give use new features, fix bugs instead.

[AgroAlba]

If you think one can iron out all the bugs before adding new features, then you might need to revisit that train of thought. Bugs are a fact, in every game, at all points through development.

And even if they polished everything nice and tight, the instant a new feature WAS added, bugs would be created. It's a natural and unfortunate part of every game development cycle.

They have a list of bugs, and they're working through them, just be patient.

Edited by AgroAntirrhopus, 30 November 2012 - 08:58 PM.

[Dr B00t]

Taron, on 30 November 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

... fix all of those bugs first!

We really do not need new features untill all the bugs of the game - and there are a lot! - are gone. So please, do not give use new features, fix bugs instead.

you dont understand how game development works, obviously

also try using the search function before starting the millionth post of this same nonsense...u just embarrass yourself

[Ryvucz]

Taron, on 30 November 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

... fix all of those bugs first!

We really do not need new features untill all the bugs of the game - and there are a lot! - are gone.

My water is contaminated, shut off my water until you get everything filtered and perfect for me.

[Az0r]

Ryvucz, on 30 November 2012 - 09:03 PM, said:

My water is contaminated, shut off my water until you get everything filtered and perfect for me.

Most ******** analogy ever. Drinking contaminated water could possibly be harmful to your health. Playing a buggy game is not.

[Ryvucz]

Az0r, on 30 November 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

Most ******** analogy ever. Drinking contaminated water could possibly be harmful to your health. Playing a buggy game is not.

I'll not count the asterisks, and think that what you really meant to say was...

Az0r, on 30 November 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

Most awesome analogy ever. Drinking contaminated water could possibly be harmful to your health. Playing a buggy game is not nearly as bad, just causes severe nerd rage and dry mouth.

[Socket7]

The people making maps and mechs are not the people who write netcode; the people who write netcode are not the ones balancing weapons, and the people balancing weapons are not the people monitoring farmers in the game.

All of these skill sets are not interchangeable. You cannot simply put the guy in charge of modeling new mechs in charge of the netcode, unless you want to make things worse.

Yelling on the forums and saying PGI is being lazy and not working hard enough helps nobody. If you want to help them, document and report all the bugs you find in agonizing detail. Figure out how to reliably reproduce them, and let the dev's know so they can take the problems they can assign the bugs to the people who can fix them.

Edited by Socket7, 30 November 2012 - 09:09 PM.

[Quad Ace]

Better to build a feature complete system, and then iron out all the bugs. Be happy that we get to play anything at this stage of development.

[Mjting]

Same bugs after 3 patches.

We don't want to repost the same problems after 3 patches again and again and not being fixed in the next patch.

Stop putting content, when the game is half playable.

[Glaive-]

Socket7, on 30 November 2012 - 09:08 PM, said:

The people making maps and mechs are not the people who write netcode; the people who write netcode are not the ones balancing weapons, and the people balancing weapons are not the people monitoring farmers in the game.

All of these skill sets are not interchangeable. You cannot simply put the guy in charge of modeling new mechs in charge of the netcode, unless you want to make things worse.

Yelling on the forums and saying PGI is being lazy and not working hard enough helps nobody. If you want to help them, document and report all the bugs you find in agonizing detail. Figure out how to reliably reproduce them, and let the dev's know so they can take the problems they can assign the bugs to the people who can fix them.

Finally someone who understands how game development teams work!

[Valaska]

Taron, on 30 November 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

... fix all of those bugs first!

We really do not need new features untill all the bugs of the game - and there are a lot! - are gone. So please, do not give use new features, fix bugs instead.

They have multiple teams working on multiple aspects of the project at once. So what you are saying basically leaves an entire team sitting around, doing nothing, because their specialty is making and designing new features etc.

[Elder Thorn]

Taron, on 30 November 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

... fix all of those bugs first!

We really do not need new features untill all the bugs of the game - and there are a lot! - are gone. So please, do not give use new features, fix bugs instead.

i would agree, but this guy here is right:

Socket7, on 30 November 2012 - 09:08 PM, said:

The people making maps and mechs are not the people who write netcode; the people who write netcode are not the ones balancing weapons, and the people balancing weapons are not the people monitoring farmers in the game.

All of these skill sets are not interchangeable. You cannot simply put the guy in charge of modeling new mechs in charge of the netcode, unless you want to make things worse.

Yelling on the forums and saying PGI is being lazy and not working hard enough helps nobody. If you want to help them, document and report all the bugs you find in agonizing detail. Figure out how to reliably reproduce them, and let the dev's know so they can take the problems they can assign the bugs to the people who can fix them.

[HorribleGoat]

Would you guys prefer that they shut down for lets say 3 months so they can finish recoding the buggy bits. As there has been posted in the command chair, fixes are coming but they take more than a few weeks to root out.

Im happy to get at least something new to look at and fiddle with while we wait.

BETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETABETA

[Thorn Hallis]

Az0r, on 30 November 2012 - 09:06 PM, said:

Most ******** analogy ever. Drinking contaminated water could possibly be harmful to your health. Playing a buggy game is not.

I'm not so sure about the latter when I look through certain topics...

[Mounty]

Elder Thorn, on 30 November 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

i would agree, but this guy here is right:

No he isn't, it's a garbage argumant that gets thrown out every time someone suggest they concentrate on squashing bags. It may be true that artists can't fixes bugs, but the people who can are needed to get the art assets into the game and working as new features. So it's perfectly fair to suggest that they hold up on new features while they fixs some of the worst bugs. Doesn't mean the artists have to stop working.

[Socket7]

Experience with Maya, 3DStudioMax, Autodesk animator, and Photoshop does not transfer to experience with writing netcode. Nor does it transfer to knowing how to balance weapons, and being a game master or forum mod does not transfer to writing netcode or knowing how to make and animate a model.

The only garbage argument is that PGI is being lazy, and that they can just throw wave after wave of men at the problem, as if bugs were a hoard of rampaging killbots and PGI is Zap Brannigan.

[Hayashi]

To some extent people that produce content can fix bugs. For instance, a graphical bug can be fixed by the graphical team, a feature problem (weapon balance etc) can be fixed by the people who implemented them in the first place. That's kind of how we've got to this stage in the first place.

However:

• People from the graphical team cannot solve netcode bugs. Switching emphasis only works within departments.
  
• Some bugs at present may be beyond the capability of the current team to solve - particularly netcode optimisation. It's probably not a coincidence that they're attempting to hire a lead network programmer at this stage. Most bugs, however, don't fall into this category. The bugs we're seeing now are by and large not the same ones we saw in closed beta. The bugs we used to have include having absolutely no rendering of textures whatsoever (you pilot based on red triangles and minimap only, because you can't see anything else), while new bugs in recent patches include an absurdly high crash-to-desktop rate that was never an issue prior to the introduction of some new content, and disappearance of the HUD upon shutdown.
  
• Introduction of new content creates new bugs, if they were to fix all bugs for one phase, the new set of content they introduce after that will restart the whole process again. Most games never truly finish quashing all bugs entirely, but main gamebreaking ones will all be destroyed prior to Release. The more content a game has, the more bugs it will thus have. Massive games like Skyrim have accompanying massive amounts of bugs, whereas small games like Minesweeper can have none by release.
  
• The new content has to be released on some semblance of a schedule or the game will never make it to release. Some games are stuck in the phase of bugfixing forever - 'development hell': the most recent example of this is Final Fantasy XIII Versus, but it never even made it to beta. When combined with #3 it makes sense to fix bugs while also releasing content, then only switch full emphasis to bug quashing just before release in order to release the product in the shortest development time possible.
  
• This is a Beta, and the B there stands for Bugs. Admittedly it's a relatively special Beta, since normally progress from even Open Beta is never carried into Release - but adequate communication has been made that spending money at this stage is a purchase-at-your-own-risk thing.
  
• We only see the product, we can't see the process going on behind the scenes. A lot of optimisation and bug fixes are invisible to the general end user. Thus they're better positioned to decide on what to fix and what to implement on what schedule than we are. We are better positioned to see what the bugs are, and to report them to them development team for fixing. Deciding on the priorities for them is not our job.

That's about it.


I'm closing the thread because this isn't the kind of thing that would really help the game at this point due to #6. This is NOT to say that fixing bugs are a minor issue, or their approach at present is necessarily the best one with respect to every single bug. If you come up with ideas on how to fix some of the bugs, please do post, it's entirely possible you can think of stuff the current dev team cannot. When you see bugs - please do post: that's more or less the main purpose of this subforum in the first place. [Patch feedback: talk about the latest patch and any new issues it caused. General discussion: talk about the game in its overall state, and bugs that have persisted for some time. Suggestions: ideas on new content.] Also, because it's horrendously vague. If you don't want to see a new feature currently in development (for instance, 3rd person [!!!]), feedback on that, accompanied by reasons, are welcome - but 'all new content' is a little bit over the top.

Tl;dr, closing because this isn't really going to help things much.

Edited by Hayashi, 01 December 2012 - 10:33 AM.