Maybe Beta Test all Updates and point releases?

Hydrino

Hydrino
Each full rollout to Prod servers seems to garner feedback that they need additional tweaks and balance based on the customer experience.

Fixes often introduce additional bugs that QA didn't catch, or don't fix the intended issue. The QA team don't have forever nor the numbers that the player base/ customers have. This is why UAT is important and not just internal use case/test.

FD should consider beta test of all releases with some feedback threads before rolling them out to production/live servers. This has been mentioned before. But FD isn't transparent enough to understand the implications and if the player base / customers would support it for the increase in quality release to production.

Based on experience with releases since the Kickstarter this seems like an obvious need. And one DB previously spoke about, mentioning the testing and feedback loops leading up to V1.0 as having been key to the release quality and positive reviews.

For update 9, this is no different. Numerous new bugs and feedback on the SRV indicating additional tweak/balance with old SRV needed. Military SRV less accurate than Science SRV; maybe realistic but still weird. stellar lighting coloration still seems not fixed but advertised as fixed. Limpet update seems to have caused multiple commanders big headaches with controls/fire group bugs, Exobiology scanning issues randomly introduced, etc.

Comms about immediate issues are better (the longer term, not so much). But testing and production rollout doesn't seem to be "better".
 

ZeroUltra

Z
I just find it hard to believe they quality insured this last update at all. Crash to desktop on accessing stored modules? Crashing on SRV? It's absurd, players usually do at least on of those things every single game session.
 

Mogen Teras

M
Chuckgofer said:
Or at least put the updates up on a Public Test server for a period of time long enough for players to actually do testing.
Click to expand...
Actually they USED to have a test server for testing updates before releasing them. They decided to stop doing that because, if I recall, they said the players were asking for faster updates, and foregoing test servers meant faster updates.
 

cmdr milesred

cmdr milesred
its been asked sooo many times.

for normal worlds its a thing to actually test what you code, but even that is too much to ask here....
At times I feel all they want is salt, and they are very good at creating the foundation for it.

my guess is as always, no one at frontier actually plays what they create. as such, effects of code are un-noticed unless it actually pops up on screen that an error has been encountered.
and then they seem to get covered via multicolored snakes as a solution.
 

Christopher Roberto

C
Hydrino said:
Fixes often introduce additional bugs that QA didn't catch, or don't fix the intended issue.
Click to expand...
I don't think there is a QA team. Like today, it would have been impossible to have tested almost anything in update 9 prior to opening up to the public without noticing fire groups were broken as you'd not have been able to shoot, honk, or various other things. It's not that it wasn't tested well, it's that it wasn't tested at all.
 

Elpapo

Elpapo
The elite dangerous... this game code proved to enough complex to point, whenever new lines of code are being added, its preety sure that it will mess with something else. And its since a day 0 like this. Why bother with time-consuming, extensive and costly QA process when player base can do this much more better and for free? Rant is always free.


This became so common among if almost of all game developers in game industry in recent years, that I raise my eyebrow every time when I see rant about it, as if ppl would be blind and ignorant how things are these days, as if they thinkin that thier littey cryin about it if would change anything.

This what business corporation style did to not just frontier but preety much every other developer out there, and more bigger developer is, then its more likely that ppl who are in charge, have very litte concern about gaming itself, as they are no gamers who they pretend they are, they have no "gaming passion", they are just businessmans whom thier only game is tables at excel and makin profits out of thier firm(and yes, mister DB, you are in this boat too). This plagued game industry for so many years, and it wont go away, as there is so much money in gaming, when ppl will do happly a microtrasnactions + preordering anways, kek.

Welcome to gaming industry, where is normal that lies and false promises are Ok.

For me, evolution or progress in gaming stoped in around 2010 when devs started belive more on micro-transactions rather on quality of games they relase, as every year on, games became more and more complex, to point where "usual" 3-5 years dev process is nowhere enough to deliver a decent finished product on relase labled as AAA title. But on other hand, lots players themselfs starts to cry like "when my GTA6 (or my ship interiors) will be relased" and this is sign of ignorace as well.

RDR2 from 2018, is rare exeption in modern times, to that, but again, it took 7+ years of crunch to create this masterpiece. And not many develpers out there, have "that much" time on thier hands to deliver a game, and look at SC... they are not even past 10% of what it supposed to be, 15+ years it need atleast to be halfway on what they "promised" from this day after what, 9 years in development?


This ever since this patology started, when some developers decided that they will relase unfinished product before makin it fully polished, and "fix it later" or "pretend to fix" just to make profit no matter what. And what, it worked for some, so others was encouraged by it to the point, where almost every developer out there, does it right now. They makes promises at first, and regadless if they keep thier promises or lie in end, stupid ppl whom got too many cash in thier pockets will trow money at them anyways. And sadly, its ends more often with lies in end, rather keepin a promises, as this seems easier. And those companies makes more and more profit each year.
 
Last edited:

Cmdr Derzelat

C
Hydrino said:
Each full rollout to Prod servers seems to garner feedback that they need additional tweaks and balance based on the customer experience.

Fixes often introduce additional bugs that QA didn't catch, or don't fix the intended issue. The QA team don't have forever nor the numbers that the player base/ customers have. This is why UAT is important and not just internal use case/test.

FD should consider beta test of all releases with some feedback threads before rolling them out to production/live servers. This has been mentioned before. But FD isn't transparent enough to understand the implications and if the player base / customers would support it for the increase in quality release to production.

Based on experience with releases since the Kickstarter this seems like an obvious need. And one DB previously spoke about, mentioning the testing and feedback loops leading up to V1.0 as having been key to the release quality and positive reviews.

For update 9, this is no different. Numerous new bugs and feedback on the SRV indicating additional tweak/balance with old SRV needed. Military SRV less accurate than Science SRV; maybe realistic but still weird. stellar lighting coloration still seems not fixed but advertised as fixed. Limpet update seems to have caused multiple commanders big headaches with controls/fire group bugs, Exobiology scanning issues randomly introduced, etc.

Comms about immediate issues are better (the longer term, not so much). But testing and production rollout doesn't seem to be "better".
Click to expand...
Since odyssey launched, what period of time or update was not a beta... Even what you play now with update 9 is a beta.... Sally gathering info about bugs and forward them to devs, us as gamers testing by gameplay whatever goes wrong... Its a thin line and people are crossing it happy to help.. We are playing a continuous beta.. What do you think "constructive criticism" that Arthur and co are talking about, really is about... Let them know about bugs and problems in a civilised way, like any beta tester would do(not implying that players should not be civilised, but only this kind of info is worthy, rest are just "complainers" asking for further development) . Dont complain from a full launched game pov and as a gamer. All that remains is a choice of whether you participate or not, but make no mistake, the game doesnt need a beta cus you,me and everyone else is the beta testers like it or not.
 
Last edited:

CaptainPugwash

CaptainPugwash
Hydrino said:
Each full rollout to Prod servers seems to garner feedback that they need additional tweaks and balance based on the customer experience.

Fixes often introduce additional bugs that QA didn't catch, or don't fix the intended issue. The QA team don't have forever nor the numbers that the player base/ customers have. This is why UAT is important and not just internal use case/test.

FD should consider beta test of all releases with some feedback threads before rolling them out to production/live servers. This has been mentioned before. But FD isn't transparent enough to understand the implications and if the player base / customers would support it for the increase in quality release to production.

Based on experience with releases since the Kickstarter this seems like an obvious need. And one DB previously spoke about, mentioning the testing and feedback loops leading up to V1.0 as having been key to the release quality and positive reviews.

For update 9, this is no different. Numerous new bugs and feedback on the SRV indicating additional tweak/balance with old SRV needed. Military SRV less accurate than Science SRV; maybe realistic but still weird. stellar lighting coloration still seems not fixed but advertised as fixed. Limpet update seems to have caused multiple commanders big headaches with controls/fire group bugs, Exobiology scanning issues randomly introduced, etc.

Comms about immediate issues are better (the longer term, not so much). But testing and production rollout doesn't seem to be "better".
Click to expand...
Aren’t we already beta testing??
 

LKx

L
In wiser times they did beta test major updates, but patches we have now are a different thing, they need to be faster to patch the alpha, and there's no time to test them seriously.
Maybe when odyssey gets to beta state (and i think we are close to that), there will be time to beta test further updates.
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
5xhnj9.jpg
 

Cmdr. Numa

Cmdr. Numa
I was all for betatesting each and every update, but after seeing how the bugs in the Odyssey Alpha test got basically ignored and the product released with them anyway, I'm no longer convinced that betatesting even has any effect. If FDEV are ignoring the findings in alphas/betas, they can as well drop them
 

Pigletslastand

Pigletslastand
Cmdr Derzelat said:
Since odyssey launched, what period of time or update was not a beta... Even what you play now with update 9 is a beta.... Sally gathering info about bugs and forward them to devs, us as gamers testing by gameplay whatever goes wrong... Its a thin line and people are crossing it happy to help.. We are playing a continuous beta.. What do you think "constructive criticism" that Arthur and co are talking about, really is about... Let them know about bugs and problems in a civilised way, like any beta tester would do(not implying that players should not be civilised, but only this kind of info is worthy, rest are just "complainers" asking for further development) . Dont complain from a full launched game pov and as a gamer. All that remains is a choice of whether you participate or not, but make no mistake, the game doesnt need a beta cus you,me and everyone else is the beta testers like it or not.
Click to expand...
Hear Hear!! Absolutely this!^^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom