New fix incoming, assuming a successful update, Frontier need some breathing space.

[Maiakaat]

1.1 sounds like a disaster, but as of 3.36PM GMT a new patch is supposed to be incoming.

Frontier seemed to have quite a small team on Elite: Dangerous (Many companies work with a core technology team early on) but with the ticket backlog, and the recruitment, it seems Frontier are trying to expand to meet the size of the fan-base.

Those positions take time to fill, train and become knowledgeable, and get productive with changes that are consistently reliable. Maybe from now until after 1.2 (or even 1.3) is in we need to be more patient as nobody wants another 1.1.

We've all have moments where we've praised the game, criticised the game, asked or commented on ideas, but Frontier clearly need some time to adapt after a reasonable successful December launch (a very difficult period to pull of such a launch with such a server reliant product)

I am not a beta tester, but I don't think most people playing were expecting 1.1 so soon, and the pressure on the developers, speed of the release (and issues), not to mention being in the office today probably being one of the worst places to be in the white-collar world, (for a few hours) suggests we need to help take some of the pressure off so the team can fully establish a consistent core experience which meets the minimum expectations of 95% of the fan-base with 1.2 to build upon.

I'm expecting a lot of flac for this post, but demoralizing a pressured team and setting unrealistic expectations, (especially after an expansion in new staff to help manage the progress on ED - which alone is a challenging time) is probably going to make things worse in the immediate future, and lead to more incomplete updates.

 

[jadefriendly]

i've not enjoyed a game like this since pretty much since Frontier / First Encounters

more than gotten value for money so far. £40, dozens of hours. great value

there's a lot of self-entitled whining on here, toys out of the pram. DRAAAAAAMA!! ....same few culprits making most of the noise too.

remember: it's just a computer game. calm down....

i'm sure theres silent majority who just play the game and dont use the forum

that said, i'll keep commenting on / suggesting things i hope to see as it continues to develop

 

[starsphinx]

I agree with every word of that. I see this game as a proper cooperation between players and developers and us players need to carry our weight - its fine saying this could do with a change but do not follow it with "and I want that change 5 minutes ago".

 

[kelticfury]

Not much of a disaster, just a couple of issues and a few bleating sheep pulling a chicken little.

 

[Skellen]

Breathing space? I think Frontier has plenty of SPACE at the moment. If anything they should be putting stuff in to fill that huge empty space......

 

[tagos]

Nobody pressured them into knowing releasing a broken patch. They chose to do that for some reason they haven't explained.

No one is forcing them to try and do so many things in one patch either. They could choose to fix just point defence and then a few days later change something else once it was working. They could also choose simply not to meddle with collisions as there wasn't a problem. The same could be said of shield cell mechanics.

Basically what they do and how they do it is completely under their control. They've been making poor decisions.

We can only hope lessons have been learned. Updates are ready for release candidate status when and only when they have been properly tested. You don't just throw stuff out you know is going to cause chaos. There's simply no good reason to do that.

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

Nobody pressured them into knowing releasing a broken patch. They chose to do that for some reason they haven't explained.

No one is forcing them to try and do so many things in one patch either. They could choose to fix just point defence and then a few days later change something else once it was working. They could also choose simply not to meddle with collisions as there wasn't a problem. The same could be said of shield cell mechanics.

Basically what they do and how they do it is completely under their control. They've been making poor decisions.

We can only hope lessons have been learned. Updates are ready for release candidate status when and only when they have been properly tested. You don't just throw stuff out you know is going to cause chaos. There's simply no good reason to do that.

Stop spouting this dis-information they thought they'd fixed it in the release build, but part of the bug persisted. They DID NOT knowingly release a reported bug.

 

[Skip Intro]

Stop spouting this dis-information they thought they'd fixed it in the release build, but part of the bug persisted. They DID NOT knowingly release a reported bug.

Then it wasn't tested properly to see if it was fixed.

I would much prefer to have either small point releases or larger patches spaced out over time as long as they are tested and released without causing more issues. There was a hotfix within a short space of time for the Clipper issue and we all thought that ED had dodges a bullet there.

Little did we know that there were game breaking issues for some players still lurking in the code.

Again, I'll state that I'd rather wait two or three weeks for a tested and working patch than have one in a week that takes several days and re-patching to fix.

 

[Alcovitch]

1.1 sounds like a disaster, but as of 3.36PM GMT a new patch is supposed to be incoming.

Frontier seemed to have quite a small team on Elite: Dangerous (Many companies work with a core technology team early on) but with the ticket backlog, and the recruitment, it seems Frontier are trying to expand to meet the size of the fan-base.

Those positions take time to fill, train and become knowledgeable, and get productive with changes that are consistently reliable. Maybe from now until after 1.2 (or even 1.3) is in we need to be more patient as nobody wants another 1.1.

More patient? They beta tested this patch and there were many many reports of what was utterly broken in that patch. FD pushed the patch live instead of doing what normal developers do, which is delay the patch until game breaking issues are resolved (which is the whole damn point of beta testing btw). Maybe FD should be a bit more patient or set up a proper QA flow?

We've all have moments where we've praised the game, criticised the game, asked or commented on ideas, but Frontier clearly need some time to adapt after a reasonable successful December launch (a very difficult period to pull of such a launch with such a server reliant product)

How is this game "such a server reliant product" When it's almost all peer-to-peer based?

I am not a beta tester, but I don't think most people playing were expecting 1.1 so soon, and the pressure on the developers, speed of the release (and issues), not to mention being in the office today probably being one of the worst places to be in the white-collar world, (for a few hours) suggests we need to help take some of the pressure off so the team can fully establish a consistent core experience which meets the minimum expectations of 95% of the fan-base with 1.2 to build upon.

I'm expecting a lot of flac for this post, but demoralizing a pressured team and setting unrealistic expectations, (especially after an expansion in new staff to help manage the progress on ED - which alone is a challenging time) is probably going to make things worse in the immediate future, and lead to more incomplete updates.

Why are some of you so hell bent on coming up with ANY excuse for this developer? Take the pressure off? Let me know when my clients will get together to take the pressure of my team when they can't connect to the network, have latency issues or don't have access to core services because someone screwed up, dept is poorly managed or things were rushed without proper planning.

I remember very clearly what one of my teachers said in a Film Production class years ago. He made it very clear that at the end of the day, the general public don't care how much effort you put into a production, how long it took, the difficulties you had or the sweat and blood that was shed in the making. They will judge your film (or product) on the end result, not the road there. They paid to see it and the product they are given is all they will have and care to critique. This may sound unfair or cruel, but it's the reality of how the the world works.

FD doesn't get participation points or brownie points. They released a product at full retail price and should expect what comes with that. They also should learn from this patch fiasco and take workflow steps to prevent it's occurrence for their next patches. Basically, if you're going to have a beta, ensure you can act on feedback and bug reports to fix them before pushing out a patch that breaks the live client.

 

[tagos]

Stop spouting this dis-information they thought they'd fixed it in the release build, but part of the bug persisted. They DID NOT knowingly release a reported bug.

They did not test it. Imagining you've fixed something, hoping you've fixed something, wishing fairies come along and wave a wand or whatever doesn't count. The only thing that counts is testing your fix.

They had a problem. They did not check it was fixed, they just threw it out there. Particularly as this was a huge problem that's incompetence of the highest order. Or just not caring. Pick whichever you choose.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I remember very clearly what one of my teachers said in a Film Production class years ago. He made it very clear that at the end of the day, the general public don't care how much effort you put into a production, how long it took, the difficulties you had or the sweat and blood that was shed in the making. They will judge your film (or product) on the end result, not the road there. They paid to see it and the product they are given is all they will have and care to critique. This may sound unfair or cruel, but it's the reality of how the the world works.

FD doesn't get participation points or brownie points. They released a product at full retail price and should expect what comes with that. They also should learn from this patch fiasco and take workflow steps to prevent it's occurrence for their next patches. Basically, if you're going to have a beta, ensure you can act on feedback and bug reports to fix them before pushing out a patch that breaks the live client.

Quite. Besides, it's not like they are a tiny team of independents. They are a well-staffed, long standing commercial company whose shares are publicly traded.

 

[Skip Intro]

They had a problem. They did not check it was fixed, they just threw it out there. Particularly as this was a huge problem that's incompetence of the highest order. Or just not caring. Pick whichever you choose.

I think they had a ticking clock which forced them into release, rather than either of those options, to be fair. There's a new video floating around that 'shows off' v1.1 and I presume there was some sort of hard deadline to get both the patch and the promo out.

 

[Sams]

So...

Is it safe to take off in big ships yet?

 

[Iskariot]

1.1 sounds like a disaster, but as of 3.36PM GMT a new patch is supposed to be incoming.

Frontier seemed to have quite a small team on Elite: Dangerous (Many companies work with a core technology team early on) but with the ticket backlog, and the recruitment, it seems Frontier are trying to expand to meet the size of the fan-base.

Those positions take time to fill, train and become knowledgeable, and get productive with changes that are consistently reliable. Maybe from now until after 1.2 (or even 1.3) is in we need to be more patient as nobody wants another 1.1.

We've all have moments where we've praised the game, criticised the game, asked or commented on ideas, but Frontier clearly need some time to adapt after a reasonable successful December launch (a very difficult period to pull of such a launch with such a server reliant product)

I am not a beta tester, but I don't think most people playing were expecting 1.1 so soon, and the pressure on the developers, speed of the release (and issues), not to mention being in the office today probably being one of the worst places to be in the white-collar world, (for a few hours) suggests we need to help take some of the pressure off so the team can fully establish a consistent core experience which meets the minimum expectations of 95% of the fan-base with 1.2 to build upon.

I'm expecting a lot of flac for this post, but demoralizing a pressured team and setting unrealistic expectations, (especially after an expansion in new staff to help manage the progress on ED - which alone is a challenging time) is probably going to make things worse in the immediate future, and lead to more incomplete updates.

Good post.
Repped.

 

[Maiakaat]

So...

Is it safe to take off in big ships yet?

Nobody as confirmed since the update this afternoon/evening.

 

[Maiakaat]

Products this significant are not just thrown out there because a dev felt like hitting publish

They had a problem. They did not check it was fixed, they just threw it out there. Particularly as this was a huge problem that's incompetence of the highest order. Or just not caring. Pick whichever you choose.

I think they had a ticking clock which forced them into release, rather than either of those options, to be fair. There's a new video floating around that 'shows off' v1.1 and I presume there was some sort of hard deadline to get both the patch and the promo out.

I second that, As an outsider, Frontier seem to have a structured well established testing procedure which will include multiple scripted tests, in house testing, and closed beta testing, the most significant code contributions will have scripted test procedures followed and verified in many cases multiple times before release. That many of the issues were known about suggests the pressure which led to release despite Beta feedback was not technical incompetence, nor was it likely to be a group of employees deciding they'd had enough working on 1.1, it could be one of a few issues, all of which can probably ultimately be traced back to unreasonable expectation from one party or another at some point in time directly (or a long way removed) from the developers themselves.

The type of problems which may have led to such a problem (whichever cause may be the source) are almost certain to be amplified by increased pressure from the community IMHO - which could seriously destabilise the development team, especially a newly expanded development team, and under those conditions it will potentially affect ED negatively for a much longer duration than just a short period of restraint without major updates and features.

 

[GJ51]

So...

Is it safe to take off in big ships yet?

Seems like it, I just too k my Python out for a test drive. Not terrible, but a bit disappointing. It now feels more like an L7 than anything else. More on the lumbering side than the nimble side.

To me, they still don't have it right. I think it would have made far more sense to nerf a bit of cargo space than to kill the handling. Yes, a bit of an adjustment was in order, but the overall effect is still inconsistent.

Look at it this way. The Anaconda drives better than the L9 but has less cargo space. So how does the Python end up with more cargo space and about the same handling as the L7? Just doesn't make sense. The L7 should have the cargo cap of the Python and the Python as a result of the lower total cap should get some responsiveness back.

I honestly can't understand how this design team makes these decisions. Come to think of it, they probably don't understand how it happens either...

 

[Silent_Star]

Beta testing 1.1 for one more week to iron everything out would have been the best choice.

 

[DextersIndignation]

1.1 sounds like a disaster, but as of 3.36PM GMT a new patch is supposed to be incoming.

Frontier seemed to have quite a small team on Elite: Dangerous (Many companies work with a core technology team early on) but with the ticket backlog, and the recruitment, it seems Frontier are trying to expand to meet the size of the fan-base.

Those positions take time to fill, train and become knowledgeable, and get productive with changes that are consistently reliable. Maybe from now until after 1.2 (or even 1.3) is in we need to be more patient as nobody wants another 1.1.

We've all have moments where we've praised the game, criticised the game, asked or commented on ideas, but Frontier clearly need some time to adapt after a reasonable successful December launch (a very difficult period to pull of such a launch with such a server reliant product)

I am not a beta tester, but I don't think most people playing were expecting 1.1 so soon, and the pressure on the developers, speed of the release (and issues), not to mention being in the office today probably being one of the worst places to be in the white-collar world, (for a few hours) suggests we need to help take some of the pressure off so the team can fully establish a consistent core experience which meets the minimum expectations of 95% of the fan-base with 1.2 to build upon.

I'm expecting a lot of flac for this post, but demoralizing a pressured team and setting unrealistic expectations, (especially after an expansion in new staff to help manage the progress on ED - which alone is a challenging time) is probably going to make things worse in the immediate future, and lead to more incomplete updates.

I have given you rep, though you must understand that many of those that complain are very understanding...
The reason they are upset is over the way FD handle the whole approach to business.

Many of the player base actually work in similar industries and are upset as many of the mistakes and bugs in ED are... Well silly.

The forums are literally full of issues that need addressing, some of which could be fixed in a few hours work.
They are full of issues that are ignored until after the horse has bolted, ran down the knackers yard, eaten two midgets, appeared in a tv soap then appeared in a findus lasagne.

The reason they are baffled is they feel that FD is actually trolling them! (PD shooting own missiles, class c thrusters, so called persistent / pessimistic universe and many many more).

I understand that the FD staff are fans of Red Dwarf, but even Rimmer had better business sense!

If this was any other game, it would not really matter. But we all LOVE elite. We have the right to be upset when EVERY announcement, Update, B.S. vision and ridiculous excuse is wheeled out. I am willing to bet that we all ding the Benny Hill sound track every time we have to read them.

FD does themselves no favours allowing Mr Brookes anything as sharp as a pen never mind allowing him to enrage forum regulars with his insane trolls. "I'll look in to it" he says, Ha Ha or worse "submit a ticket" Can you imagine how angry that makes people!

Telling people to waste their time filling a ticket that we all know (Including the FD staff) will never be read stopped being funny some time ago.

Maybe its just me, but I would much prefer honesty!
Why not just say "We can be bothered" "We are playing with toy dinosaurs" or even just "Screw you"...

The latter works at World of Tanks, at least the crazy Russian is straight with his punters!

But the constant troll posts really need to stop, its bad enough trying to explain to myself why I still love the game. Never mind the fact that FD are just taking the Toilet water....

 

[Tas Devil]

More patient? They beta tested this patch and there were many many reports of what was utterly broken in that patch. FD pushed the patch live instead of doing what normal developers do, which is delay the patch until game breaking issues are resolved (which is the whole damn point of beta testing btw). Maybe FD should be a bit more patient or set up a proper QA flow?



How is this game "such a server reliant product" When it's almost all peer-to-peer based?




Why are some of you so hell bent on coming up with ANY excuse for this developer? Take the pressure off? Let me know when my clients will get together to take the pressure of my team when they can't connect to the network, have latency issues or don't have access to core services because someone screwed up, dept is poorly managed or things were rushed without proper planning.

I remember very clearly what one of my teachers said in a Film Production class years ago. He made it very clear that at the end of the day, the general public don't care how much effort you put into a production, how long it took, the difficulties you had or the sweat and blood that was shed in the making. They will judge your film (or product) on the end result, not the road there. They paid to see it and the product they are given is all they will have and care to critique. This may sound unfair or cruel, but it's the reality of how the the world works.

FD doesn't get participation points or brownie points. They released a product at full retail price and should expect what comes with that. They also should learn from this patch fiasco and take workflow steps to prevent it's occurrence for their next patches. Basically, if you're going to have a beta, ensure you can act on feedback and bug reports to fix them before pushing out a patch that breaks the live client.

This. FD are getting very good at one thing. Alienating their customers and those willing to participate in their betas... It's the wrong way to go about it and they will suffer the consequences down the line.

Why would anyone want to participate in future beta given the track record of ignoring tickets, and beta reports about glaring bugs.

We've waited for 1.1 2 months after launch... and it's still breaking bits of the game that were working before 1.1 ?

What other industry would allow this kind of sloppiness ?

Cue FD management telling us in the next newsletter how professional and hard working their team is o.0

 

[Maiakaat]

What other industry would allow this kind of sloppiness ?

I think you've hit on a good point there. I am not talking specifically any company, but the complexity of software is such that the old approach of rolling something out with minimal effort and maximum returns died along time ago, and then there was the web, and when that stopped offering a quick return for very little there was Apps.

Small and medium sized companies just don't often have the flexibility to do things right, even though we have the information to do things well. Engineers mostly do a consistently good job, though with China even that is questionable with products now with the flood of unsafe chargers, and low quality no-brand electronics.

Large companies pour millions seemingly into a research black holes at times, and are allegedly not as nimble, and still have the same problems because software is usually equally more complex.

So what is wrong in general - with software quality? What has to change? Why is a developer not worth the same as a plumber, and why is software not taken as seriously as a flyover or bridge (I would say house but it seems lately they are nearly as bad). To look at some specifics, why do some (business) customers have such an issue with the value of software or the cost of the 3rd party engineers, and why do small companies (smaller than FD) employ finance directors to manage IT budgets, deployments, plans and resourcing - whom fail to give it the same weight of importance as sales or manufacture. Why do some of these people expect unreasonable timescales and why has this issue specifically continued to persist as-if a complex piece of software is the same as the production clip produced on youtube, or some roadside billboard.

Is there some disconnect between executive decisions and who is responsible for the results of decisions when they go wrong which is amplified with software and systems support? If a bank or shareholders demands a release now rather than extending credit facilities to get it right - are they
understanding and learning from issues arising so as to make different decisions next time? What could any company hierarchy do in such a case to mitigate this type of pressure.

Because of those issues above alone there are obvious issues which surface in smaller companies, but how can they afford long R&D, or comprehensive testing when the customer, financier, shareholder or whomever else has such misconceptions - be they time issues, complexity, outsourcing opportunities not seen with appropriate risk.

We see everyone blaming everyone else, and its clear the magnitude of the change needed through the wider industry is incomprehensibly large, but even an approximate solution in our worldwide economy seems a long way off. Agile methods often rule, but are they equipped to deal with such serious complexity over the next two decades? Are the decision makers even willing to think about the long game, and long term challenges?

Back onto the topic though, I'm waffling - the issues are mostly out there now, many severe issues seem resolved, so there isn't really any point in putting the boot in unless you have something new to add. I'm sure Frontier care about the reputational damage, as do each and every developer, manager and executive.

The long slow point I am getting to; when things go bad in a team it capitulates very quickly, the best people leave quickly as they'll have at least a few direct recruiter opportunities in their inbox every week, even those with strong emotional attachments to the project, so beyond what we saw yesterday it can only be destructive and harmful to carry it on now, and by acting as everybody else does, we are also making the same mistakes, not thinking longer term, and software development certainly needs more time and flexibility to figure things out, not just Frontier