Why does it take so long to fix game issues?

I think if my memory is not failing me, that we, the community, are partly to blame.

I believe a long time ago, like 3 or 4 years ago, an official pol was made asking whether we preferred small sparse updates, that would require us to update our game more often. Or punctual updates, meaning bigger updates but less frequent.

Of course the later won the poll, and FD has organized their work schedule on that ever since.


I can be wrong tho, and imagining things.


Lol no, players are not to blame. That's like saying the driver is to blame when their car breaks. The line you quoted is fan-fiction created as there was really nothing else to say.

The OP has a valid point as bugs and unfinished bits remain in this game almost four years since launch. This is shameful to some especially how most industries are making great efforts to satisfy their customer base. NMS - or HG really - is now a great yardstick to measure how well other devs and companies support their game product. FDev could have been the yardstick but they chose not to be.
 
Cough force major aka Apple being stupid with unrequired OpenGL removal cough

.


Don't kid yourself still believing that Apple is somehow to blame. You know - or maybe don't understand the technical side - of what happened and that's FDev recoded the game for (code) commonality with consoles. It was a smart business decision for efficiencies but bad for Mac customers. Did they say this? No. But would you expect them to say "hey Mac users we are cutting you off to support the bigger customer base in consoles". No, they wouldn't say that.
 
I agree with the OP on this one. My most longstanding frustration with ED is how sloooooooow Frontier acts to address obvious and acknowledged bugs. I could understand such a crawling pace when it comes to "edge case" bugs, but not when it comes to bugs that are front and center on the mission board. The last three days of gameplay have been particularly frustrating to me because of this reason. Cases in point:

I recently took an assassination mission which went off without a hitch. However, the assassination mission triggered one of those "chained missions" - yup, this is where the problem occurred. As lots of other people have griped about in the past, my follow-on target never triggered when I scanned the NAV beacon. No matter what I did - log out, leave the system and return, cruise around the system for a while, etc. - could get the target to appear, so I was forced to abandon it. Annoying. The next day I took another assassination mission. This one also went off without a hitch, but then also triggered a chain mission. And like the previous chain, nothing happened when I scanned the NAV beacon. After flying around a bit, I just abandoned the mission in annoyance. However, here something interesting happened: my target spawned behind me and interdicted me. But because I had already abandoned the mission, thereby removing the point of its existence, all it did was fly around aimlessly and just sat and spun when I attacked it. Again, annoying. Here, we have a good idea - chained missions - being ruined by a combination of a longstanding bug (e.g., failure to spawn a target) and poor implementation (i.e., the idea of having your target ambush you is a good one, but apparently nobody at Frontier thought it was worthwhile to inform the player of this switcheroo. Why not just inform the player via an inbox message that triggers when the NAV is scanned that the target cannot be located and we should be on our guard as we patrol the system?).

Okay, two frustrating experiences but I wasn't going to allow that to damper my gameplay! So I persisted on with a massacre mission....Yeah, yeah! I know. Bad move based on all the complaints I have seen here. [big grin] I had already experienced the clearly broken pirate massacre mission whereby legitimate targets are not counted towards mission goals - how many months has this been going on now? - but I found a small (4 targets) non-pirate massacre mission, so I figured how bad could this be? Bad. [big grin] My first attempt to get kills resulted in me finding zero targets in the local NAV, no matter how many times I dropped in there, and never once finding a target in a USS. As the system lacked any REZ sites, I was thereby forced to endlessly lap the system looking for targets in SC. The same thing happened every time: two targets would spawn simultaneously, and I would have to rush to get into position and interdict them before they left SC to dock at a station (i.e., despawn). I managed this twice over a few hours before I gave up in frustration. Sure, my lack of interdiction skills are part of the problem, but the bigger problem is that these massacre mission templates are just poorly implemented, as plenty of others have pointed out. They are designed to frustrate. Why not have at least one target spawn every time the player drops into a NAV? And why not have a mission target USS pop up as they do in other missions instead of forcing the player to drop into random USS instances? And while having targets cruise around the system is a good idea, why have two spawn simultaneously and then despawn until the player leaves SC and later returns (at least that is the way it seemed to work for me. The SC targets never spawned again until I dropped out of SC and then reentered SC). Just spawn one at a time, and when the first despawns, trigger another spawning.

In both cases - the chained missions and the massacre mission templates - clear bugs and poorly implemented templates have been plaguing the game for months now, with the community being very vocal about how unsatisfactory this state of affairs is. And these aren't "edge case" missions, but routine activities found on or triggered by the mission board. Yet here we are, suffering with this stuff for months and months. That is bad on its own, but what makes it even worse is that 2018's "Beyond" was supposed to be all about addressing this "QoL" stuff as a priority over new content. While the first content drop was a good one, the second addressed little QoL stuff (if any), and I am not optimistic about next week's drop.

It is very frustrating.

Coincidentally, I had a similar experience to the OP, but in my case it was with Eve Online. My frustration with ED actually drove me to awaken my relatively new Alpha clone over there as a means of escape from the teeth grinding caused by Elite. Sure, Eve has its own problems, but the first thing I noticed about the game upon my return was how polished everything is. My heart actually leaped for joy when I saw CCP's monthly patching schedule. [big grin] I am sure that game suffers from its own plethora of bugs - Eve's own forum has its fair share of grumblers - but from my end everything seemed to work the way it was supposed to work. Nothing made me feel like I was wrestling with unaddressed bugs or poorly implemented gameplay templates that felt like stale leftovers from the beta testing days.

Don't misunderstand: this is not a "pox on your house!" rant against Frontier, nor a "Space Game X is so much better!" diatribe. I will remain a loyal player for some time as ED is my favorite space game of all time. HOWEVER, I have to be honest: Elite 2018 is starting to remind me of Elite 2015 when the game seemed to be held together by duct tape and fervent prayers. 2018 was supposed to make the game more polished, but instead it feels shabbier than it has in some time. Yes, I do appreciate the new content and ships, but none of that can make up for gameplay content that remains poorly developed or just outright bugged in a very noticeable way. I don't think any of the problems I encountered above would require a huge investment of time to fix, but yet they persist month after month after month; quarterly release after quarterly release after quarterly release....

So, no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going anywhere. For the long term. But I do suddenly find myself needing to take a break from Elite for a few days because those bugged/poorly implemented missions left a bad taste in my mouth, and Eve Online seems so shiny and professional by comparison (Oops! Did I say that out loud? :p). But Frontier does need to start getting on the ball in the patching department because even a devoted fan like me is starting to feel put-off by Frontier's disinterested attitude towards improving the base game. Honestly, I was prepared to spend some money on the store in Elite, but I really think I might redirect some of that money to make my Alpha clone into an Omega. Frankly, this would never have happened if Elite felt as polished as Eve.
 
Last edited:
To be fair, the last No man's sky's update was filled with bugs that are way more serious than anything we've ever seen in ED. Bugs that would prevent some players from accessing progression quests, bugs that would prevent old players from accessing new items, bugs that would make the whole fleet mission system completely unusable, even bugs that would erase save files. I think there is still the bug that allows player to dupe items through the refiner, essentially allowing anyone to become a billionaire in a couple hours.

Yeah maybe Frontier don't remove bugs as fast, but the game also has less bugs to begin with. A slower approach to fixing bugs is also less likely to create new ones while patching the others.
 
Ironically, in the NMS thread, the topic of them (Hello Games/NMS) not having an official forum to have discussions just like these, has come up a few times.
 
The missions are so buggy that you can only pick a few of what's available, which is really frustrating.

Recently I have been running Assasinate Pirate Lord missions and they too have issues.

1. Target mission doesn't spawn.
2. Multiple targets drop into the instance if you have a few targets in the same system.
Also the mission targets usually target each other so you pick them of quite easily.

The target really has to spawn.
Four ways the target spawns.
First, they interdict you.
Second, they spawn at the Nav point before you scan the beacon.
Third, scan the beacon and you will be given a planet to fly to trigger the target.
Fourth, mission update from an NPC, follow his wake for new location.
The most likely to fail is the fourth option and if you get a mission critical message that you have the wrong target information, they mostly always fail to spawn

And I'm pretty sure multiple mission targets shouldn't spawn in the same instance.
When they fight each other it's laughable.

Neither are game breaking but how long does it take to fix these. Most of the time months if they even bother to fix them at all.
 
Ironically, in the NMS thread, the topic of them (Hello Games/NMS) not having an official forum to have discussions just like these, has come up a few times.

After the reaction the lead dev of NMS got on the release of the game I'm not surprised he wanted some distance between himself and the "fans". They even threatened reporters for mentioning delays.
 
...yeah it is not ideal but NMS is single player game and ED is massive online game. Difference is so huge that it is not funny. Being single player allows for easier rollout of fixes as you know it won't impact other parts of game so gravely.
Objectively wrong. NMS is a multiplayer game, might be different from EDs multiplayer but so is FDs multiplayer different from normal MMOs (player trading, anti-cheat systems, better group PVe gameplay loops / rewards etc).
 
I've been playing No Mans Sky recently and noticed that the rate at which the bugs are getting fixed compared to Elite is nothing short of a miracle. I was looking at the patch releases here

and how many bugs are being fixed in such a short period of time and it really puts ED to shame. They actually seem to take the bug reports from players and fix stuff within a few weeks even the small issues yet Elite has bugs and games issues that are still around from years ago.

What are Hello Games doing differently and would it be possible for Frontier to maybe learn a few things from over there with regards to how development and bug fixing is tackled?

Would it be worthwhile Frontier assigning some more resources toward fixing game issues rather than releasing yet more weapons that I personally don't really care about?
As a software developer, my assessment is that ED's code quality is probably not particularly good. As an example, the lack of HUD colors has been a common complaint for years and it still hasn't been fixed. I'm guessing that code is terrible and no one wants to touch it.

As for how often new bugs are introduced and how long it takes to fix them, I think FD doesn't have nearly enough automated tests. Any large complex program should be built with testing in mind. It's a serious pain to try to add automatic tests later.

Adding more people to the team is actually a bad idea. I know that seems counter-intuitive, but it's been shown to be true many times. It's something that is taught as part of computer science. More details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month

It's likely that the reason Hello Games is making such fast progress is that they have a SMALL dedicated team which understands their code, follows modern programing techniques, and has excellent automated tests.
 
Last edited:
As a software developer, my assessment is that ED's code quality is probably not particularly good. As an example, the lack of HUD colors has been a common complaint for years and it still hasn't been fixed. I'm guessing that code is terrible and no one wants to touch it.

Not really. It uses third party middleware and making it do what we would like it to do without complete rewrite and possibly introducing your own solution is not possible. Sometimes software used to do things can't do that small step left or right you might want and refactor is required.

As for FD doing automated tests - yes, although it is debatable how much of it is actually achievable. But yes, feels some integration tests and CI might help them to overcome some of issues with complex parts of code, especially server side.

It's likely that the reason Hello Games is making such fast progress is that they have a SMALL dedicated team which understands their code, follows modern programing techniques, and has excellent automated tests.

And is relatively simple single player game to begin with. Still tons of bugs and released game in alpha state.

Objectively wrong. NMS is a multiplayer game, might be different from EDs multiplayer but so is FDs multiplayer different from normal MMOs (player trading, anti-cheat systems, better group PVe gameplay loops / rewards etc).

Calling NMS a multiplayer game in any comparable sense is like calling Skyrim MMO. It is not. It is tackled simple coop mode, which doesn't care about any persistance like at all. It is buggy as hell and certainly not comparable to ED. Overall NMS is just simpler game, which much singular focus. Thus making feature changes and bug fixes easier to deploy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: NW3
Always a pleasure reading the desperate attempts of ignorant white knights (tm) to find more and more inventive ways to excuse FD's blatant incompetence [haha]

Especially since things such as $##systemname and the like take them months yet still there are idiots that will explain to you, weeks on end, why fixing even simple typos should take years if a dev studio does it "right" ;)

HG implemented space legs, atmospheric planets with procedural flora AND fauna, planetary exploration, player built planetary bases, customizable capital ships, etc. etc. etc. with a team at least 6 times smaller than what FD claims work full time on Elite, yet came out 2 years AFTER Elite, so why should we be surprised that they can fix bugs faster too? FD can't even find even remotely competent people to draw simple skin packs every week thus they simply finger-paint them themselves as of late - apparently they prefer to refund people rather then actually fix said finger-painted "skins" too. Expecting them to dive into actual program source code and know what they're doing as to fix anything - get real people - set your expectations low. No, lower! I said LOWER! Yes, that will do.
 
Last edited:
Always a pleasure reading the desperate attempts of ignorant white knights (tm) to find more and more inventive ways to excuse FD's blatant incompetence [haha]

Especially since things such as $##systemname and the like take them months yet still there are idiots that will explain to you, weeks on end, why fixing even simple typos should take years if a dev studio does it "right" ;)

HG implemented space legs, atmospheric planets with procedural flora AND fauna, planetary exploration, player built planetary bases, customizable capital ships, etc. etc. etc. with a team at least 6 times smaller than what FD claims work full time on Elite, yet came out 2 years AFTER Elite, so why should we be surprised that they can fix bugs faster too? FD can't even find even remotely competent people to draw simple skin packs every week thus they simply finger-paint them themselves as of late - apparently they prefer to refund people rather then actual fix said finger-painter "skins" too. Expecting them to dive into actual program source code and know what they're doing as to fix anything - get real people - set your expectations low. No, lower! I said LOWER! Yes, that will do.

Does NMS have HOTAS support, places to fly to and a flight model that isn't awful yet, or is it still not worth considering ?.
 
At least to a certain degree, it comes down to player perception: Going through the list of patch notes (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php/74-Patch-Notes) it can't be denied that FD are fixing bugs, tons of them - but that doesn't really help me if the bugs I experience aren't on that list. For example, I'm still experiencing crashes, when trying to access the mission board after selling large amounts of exploration data. This bug has been in the game for a long, long time.
The thing is, it's not really different with NMS. HG definitely are pushing out bugfixes regularly - but still, many serious bugs are still in the game. Just yesterday I died yet again, because I fell through the landing pad of my frigate. A friend of mine still keeps killing himself when he shoots asteroids in multiplayer. Many players still cannot complete several main story quests (some of these problems have been in the game since 1.3 last year). And I haven't heard anything that the refinery duping glitch has been fixed yet, either (I haven't tried myself recently, but even if it's fixed now it survived a lot of patches).

So why aren't these fixed by now? Well, because it is not easy. Just knowing it exists does not make you able to fix it. The bug has to be reproduced, the cause of it has to be found, it may come down to hardware or driver issues that need to be addressed by the manufacturer. And in the end a bugfix needs to be developed and tested, that does not create any new issues and does not require players to start a new save game for it to work. I can absolutely see that latter point to be a real issue, I'm sure few people would be willing to delete all their progress because a patch made it necessary.

Now, of course FD needs to tackle some of the heavy issues as quickly as possible - but so do HG.
 
A part of bug fixes is a background work which takes place behind the scenes and is included in updates that we do not even know (perhaps)

For example during server maintenance
 
As soon as I hear someone praised a software company for fixing a multitude of bugs, my first thought isn't how good they are, it is just how many bugs does the software actually have!

Addendum: Also, it isn't the quantity of bugs being fixed, it is the quality of the bugs being fixed. Some bugs are a simple couple of minutes task, others can have serious follow-though repercussions that take up a lot of man hours

I remember when I was in Defense, one of our contractors were taken to task (basically payments were withheld) due to the number of bugs in their software which rendered it nearly unusable. We gave them a set time period to fix their mess and sure enough, just prior to the end date they rocked up with a very impressive list of bug fixes and their hand out for the cheque. Unfortunately for them, in our team we have a few guys who had degrees in computer science and were well recognised in the industry as being extremely capable coders. They had done their own assessment of the software and had compiled a very extensive list of problems, sorted into Mandatory/Requested/Cosmetic groups. Yep the company fixed all the cosmetic (read QoL type, no impact on performance, things like making menus clearer etc) and some of the Requested and not one of the Mandatory. They were surprised when their contract wasn't renewed!
 
Last edited:
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: NW3
Back
Top Bottom