42 replies to this topic

[ACWILD]

Now, with all the love in the world....how can you define a 9,6 GB patch....a SMALL patch?????????????

Come on...really.....

[Mead]

It was about 22 mb for me, you sure your computer isn't embezzling bandwidth on the side?

[Rydiak Randborir]

Definitely 22mb. OP, check your game's file integrity.

[ACWILD]

****.....
I defintely have to change my PC

[Krivvan]

I think the bigger point is that ALL accel and deccel quirks from Dec. 1 weren't on the whole time until now.

[LegendaryArticuno]

Madcats getting nerfed...

[Jman5]

Speaking of the patch. Make sure you guys test them in an actual game. I'm pretty sure they do not work in the testing ground.

[DrxAbstract]

Krivvan, on 22 February 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

I think the bigger point is that ALL accel and deccel quirks from Dec. 1 weren't on the whole time until now.

And we didn't really seem to notice... Time to dust off the Locust, buhahahaha!

[Felicitatem Parco]

Time for the Rifleman to have a reason to exist!

They have massive accel/decel quirks that set them aside from Jagers.

[sycocys]

The bigger story is 1 monthly patch and 2 hotfix patches in the first week afterward. XD

At this rate they'll end up patching 10 times as often as if they just stuck with the original patch schedule.

Edited by sycocys, 22 February 2016 - 04:23 PM.

[Sandpit]

Krivvan, on 22 February 2016 - 03:28 PM, said:

I think the bigger point is that ALL accel and deccel quirks from Dec. 1 weren't on the whole time until now.

The biggest point is that it took PGI's QA that long to even notice...

Do they even bother playing the game?!!??!?!
I mean if I jump into a mech and it moves a certain way and then I jump into it in the "live" server and it moves differently, I think I might notice, especially if my job specifically requires me to test those things...

DrxAbstract, on 22 February 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

And we didn't really seem to notice... Time to dust off the Locust, buhahahaha!

How are we supposed to notice? We had no reference point. We didn't get to see them with their performance adjusted.

[MrJeffers]

Sandpit, on 23 February 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

The biggest point is that it took PGI's QA that long to even notice...

Do they even bother playing the game?!!??!?!
I mean if I jump into a mech and it moves a certain way and then I jump into it in the "live" server and it moves differently, I think I might notice, especially if my job specifically requires me to test those things...


How are we supposed to notice? We had no reference point. We didn't get to see them with their performance adjusted.

Actually if you look at the hotfix patch notes it is a bigger issue than that. When they were testing they *did* see the quirks because they were playing against a different test server control system. But the settings only worked against their internal test server settings because of the way they handled quirks in tiers.

So QA isn't, and likely has never been, testing the actual code that gets released in the production builds. It's a (slightly?) different test environment.

Edited by MrJeffers, 23 February 2016 - 09:48 AM.

[Sandpit]

MrJeffers, on 23 February 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

Actually if you look at the hotfix patch notes it is a bigger issue than that. When they were testing they *did* see the quirks because they were playing against a different test server control system. But the settings only worked against their internal test server settings because of the way they handled quirks in tiers.

So QA isn't, and likely has never been, testing the actual code that gets released in the production builds. It's a (slightly?) different test environment.

uhm
I did read
It said "It worked great on the test server for our internal QA"
Then we didn't notice that it didn't go live for nearly 3 months

So again

Sandpit, on 23 February 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

The biggest point is that it took PGI's QA that long to even notice...

Do they even bother playing the game?!!??!?!
I mean if I jump into a mech and it moves a certain way and then I jump into it in the "live" server and it moves differently, I think I might notice, especially if my job specifically requires me to test those things...

[DrxAbstract]

Sandpit, on 23 February 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

How are we supposed to notice? We had no reference point. We didn't get to see them with their performance adjusted.

Our reference point was that many of the Mechs affected already had movement quirks and we didn't seem to notice the sharp drop in performance despite those numbers staying relatively the same for most Mechs on the readouts. It was noticeable on the Locust, but I chalked that up to the reduction it received - It never occurred to me it was from them not functioning whatsoever. No need to take offense or pretend it was an imperceptible change though.

[CDLord HHGD]

Now that I run this though Steam, I don't even know when my game patches anymore.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

cdlord, on 23 February 2016 - 10:11 AM, said:

Now that I run this though Steam, I don't even know when my game patches anymore.

Which is a blissful way of never knowing that so far the monthly patch QA is worse than the fortnightly QA

[Mystere]

MrJeffers, on 23 February 2016 - 09:47 AM, said:

Actually if you look at the hotfix patch notes it is a bigger issue than that. When they were testing they *did* see the quirks because they were playing against a different test server control system. But the settings only worked against their internal test server settings because of the way they handled quirks in tiers.

So QA isn't, and likely has never been, testing the actual code that gets released in the production builds. It's a (slightly?) different test environment.

And that is why we actually require confirmation from both developers and business owners that deployed things actually work as part of our ITIL process.

[Sandpit]

DrxAbstract, on 23 February 2016 - 10:07 AM, said:

Our reference point was that many of the Mechs affected already had movement quirks and we didn't seem to notice the sharp drop in performance despite those numbers staying relatively the same for most Mechs on the readouts. It was noticeable on the Locust, but I chalked that up to the reduction it received - It never occurred to me it was from them not functioning whatsoever. No need to take offense or pretend it was an imperceptible change though.

You are trying to say that a player should notice their mech turning at a .05 difference when the devs said it was in?

I'm not offended, I'm not going to let this be a "players' shoulda noticed" issue when it's entirely PGI's screwup.

They made it, they owned it, they fixed it.
That's great, I'm pointing out that the player and customer concern should be that this major of a gaff should be cause for concern and customers need to not "hammer" PGI over this, but they should really be asking some serious questions at this point because this isn't a new game, team, or company at this point. Stuff like this should not happen. Even excusing that it did happen, it should NOT take 3 months to figure it out.

PGI has metric tools
PGI supposedly plays this game
PGI supposedly monitors this game

If they're investing that time, money, manpower, and resources into those areas, stuff like this should not happen. It's a major issue with something that many in the community have complained about for years. PGI's QA process, is mediocre at best many times. They seem to have no clue how many of their things will play out on live servers.

It's a testing and QA issue and it needs to be addressed. There's no excuse for that length of time to have passed before this was caught.

[DrxAbstract]

Sandpit, on 23 February 2016 - 11:22 AM, said:

You are trying to say that a player should notice their mech turning at a .05 difference when the devs said it was in?

I'm not offended, I'm not going to let this be a "players' shoulda noticed" issue when it's entirely PGI's screwup.

They made it, they owned it, they fixed it.
That's great, I'm pointing out that the player and customer concern should be that this major of a gaff should be cause for concern and customers need to not "hammer" PGI over this, but they should really be asking some serious questions at this point because this isn't a new game, team, or company at this point. Stuff like this should not happen. Even excusing that it did happen, it should NOT take 3 months to figure it out.

PGI has metric tools
PGI supposedly plays this game
PGI supposedly monitors this game

If they're investing that time, money, manpower, and resources into those areas, stuff like this should not happen. It's a major issue with something that many in the community have complained about for years. PGI's QA process, is mediocre at best many times. They seem to have no clue how many of their things will play out on live servers.

It's a testing and QA issue and it needs to be addressed. There's no excuse for that length of time to have passed before this was caught.

The difference was far, far, FAR greater than 0.5 degrees/sec. That said, I'm not hammering PGI nor was I making this a "People should have noticed" case.

That said, it's not a big deal. I was making a jest of the situation and it seems to be getting blown out of proportion.

[DaZur]

Meh... If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around does it make a noise?

While PGI clearly screwed the pooch in the QA department, the fact that no one noticed IMHO implies how little an issue it was.

Having done QA in a past life, I can empathize with who ever is in charge of it for PGI. When you are QA'ing a project that does not have a single entry point for code change and there is a change log that's only as good as the people who are supposed to keep it accurate... QA'ing this project is likely akin to herding cats.