Dishevel, on 08 April 2013 - 02:21 PM, said:
Ban yourself.
My request that they keep their money making and their real patches separate so that we do not have to suffer through crap that should have been rolled back so they can keep their money is not whining or bitching.
They made a horrible patch.
They compounded the issue by releasing a money generating mech with the patch.
That means they had to make a decision. Lose the money we need to make the game or roll back the patch till we fix the bug.
They make their choice. Not saying I would not have made the same one if I had made the same mistake.
But for Gods sake. Do not argue with having them separate out **** they make money with from real patches so that when it happens again we do not have to suffer.
Unless you think it is an awesome idea. In that case please check yourself into a mental hospital.
So help me understand what impact the release of Heavy Metal had on stability? Or are you saying that having released heavy metal they can't roll the patch back? It was a lot more than just Heavy Metal, some maps content got updated, shaders, vision modes, the actual changes seem to have been pretty beefy. Trying to 'roll that back' is going to create drama enough of its own.
The presence or absence of a new mech, sales, that has nothing to do with the hud issues.
As to the advice not to spend money on the game I would absolutely advise you to not only not spend money on the game if you're upset but even not play for a while. You're participating in a beta, that's pretty clear up front. It's certainly not for everyone. Come back in 6 months and see where it's at. Insulting the developer and trying to tell them how to run their business because you're.... upset I guess? How helpful do you think that is?
If you've successfully run or managed a software business, are familiar with product development lifecycles or have even just written business cases for funding F2P games in the same model then why are you on this forum and not speaking with a venture capitalist to make your own game or even get involved with the development of MWO from the top down?
Seriously, no offense here man but if you don't actually have a business degree or experience in this sort of stuff directly then you don't know what you're talking about. Having an opinion is not the same as knowing how something works and knowing how to do it better.
This makes matters worse because you're taking a legitimate problem (hud bugs, issues generated with the new patch) and muddying it with stuff that just isn't reasonable/rational (making baseless claims about how PGI should run their business OR ELSE). It's a good thing to say 'I've got the following problems since the patch and it's left me unable to play the game, I'm not going to further fund or support MWO until these issues can be resolved to some greater or lesser degree'. You also submit as detailed a ticket to support as you can on the problems you're having, your system and what changed. Obviously they're not easily replicating those problems in house or it'd be fixed already. Maybe your submission is the one with the key that drops the solution into place.
I've worked with business software development for a lot of years (I'm no coder but the UAT, putting the beta in the hands of end users, getting their feedback, managing tickets for dev, etc) and that's how most stuff gets fixed. They get a crap ton of feedback, parse it and finally they either luck out or get enough that it falls into place and points out the culprit (or sometimes they know the culprit but not the solution) and BOOM. Fixed. I've seen a $130 million dollar development project get hamstrung for weeks by a problem that when the fix was identified got done in literally 2 minutes while on a conference call at 1am.
What doesn't help is insulting the devs. There's no point at which that's going to be helpful. What it will do is, regardless of how genuinely they want to try and help you, learn to ignore your opinions. It's human nature. You attack someone and they will be inherently defensive towards you and people like you. You're devaluing your opinion when you do that.
l4Dl, on 08 April 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:
This isnt a fact, nor is it a valid excuse.
A rollback takes at most 60 minutes to complete:
- You simply compile the previous build
- Update the servers with the previous server build
- Remove all references to the new Hero mech in the player stats SQL database.
- Run a quick internal QA test on the live servers before opening to the public
- Update the launcher code at master server to patch required files.
I hope that clears it up for you.
I believe the real reason to denying a rollback is due to the new Hero mech being put on sale. Instead of only applying the new mech to the build, it appears a update to the code was also applied without being tested fully at QA.
To rollback would remove the sale/hero mech from the game, fixing the current build, but creating less sales.
Its all basic logic, you just have to think about it, clearly.
Show your PGI credentials please? Because otherwise you're making assumptions about how whatever software work you may or may not be familiar with relates to how MWO is being run, which is utterly pointless. MWO is a beta in limited production. You don't just 'roll it back'. In fact I've never worked on any software product in production that got rolled back unless it was a complete failure to launch, which this one wasn't. In fact even the ones that totally and completely crashed it out didn't get rolled back, they just got the offending aspect patched out by a hotfix.
So unless you're working for PGI your anecdotal recommendations are not very useful.
6
