Is there an internal Testers / Beta Tester Group?

MadTommy · #1 05-15-2012, 09:49 AM

Is there an internal Testers / Beta Tester Group?

If so where are they, if not why not?

I assume there is not one.. which seems amazingly baffling, how can the team test MP issues without a sizeable test group that can test new builds?

Cheers.

SlipBall · #2 05-15-2012, 09:54 AM

We are all testers

...just send crash reports, add suggestions, participate with the bug tracker.

MadTommy · #3 05-15-2012, 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlipBall

We are all testers

...just send crash reports, add suggestions, participate with the bug tracker.

I'm all too aware we are all testers. Personally i don't want to be a tester. Of course I will happily submit bug reports that i find that have not already been found, however i don't have the time to troll through 100s of posts to do this efficiently.

It seems to me to be a far from ideal situation not to have a dedicated test team that can give far more concise feedback and bug reports to the developers, rather than an open forum.

There are many dedicated members here who could be internal testers that would streamline this whole bug squashing process. After internal testing i'm all for beta patches to the masses to give a larger test to help locate harder to locate issues, but alpha patches to the public seems a odd way to do it.

GraveyardJimmy · #4 05-15-2012, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadTommy

It seems to me to be a far from ideal situation not to have a dedicated test team that can give far more concise feedback and bug reports to the developers, rather than an open forum.

Developers have stated there are internal testing teams. Like other games (red Orchestra 2 for example) they need a larger sample size to reproduce bugs and find all of them, hence releasing patches for testing rather than general release. Testing is usually done in a similar manner in many studios (such as RO2): Internal testing (by team and smaller groups which can be costly) then after that move to a larger group (either under an NDA before release or by volunteers for new patches, like now) then rework patches or release.

Even hardware manufacturers like NVIDIA release public beta tests after internal testing.

SEE · #5 05-15-2012, 12:02 PM

I supose MP would be a bit of a problem too. A popular server such as ATAG when testing a beta version would only be accessible to the players approved for beta testing.

It could work for SP though and prevent some of the harsh negative feedback that follows when a beta doesn't quite match users expectations (at the end of the day - installing a beta is optional not mandatory).

SiThSpAwN · #6 05-15-2012, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadTommy

I'm all too aware we are all testers. Personally i don't want to be a tester. Of course I will happily submit bug reports that i find that have not already been found, however i don't have the time to troll through 100s of posts to do this efficiently.

Testing is optional, if you dont want to be a tester then dont install the patches until they are official.

MadTommy · #7 05-15-2012, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN

Testing is optional, if you dont want to be a tester then dont install the patches until they are official.

That's a little black & white and disingenuous to be honest.

We all want the game to be running as good as possible, hence we will all try any patches, especially after waiting for 7 months or so to have severe problems fixed. The track record shows no matter what a patch is call, alpha, beta or official we still are very much still testing. No patch to date has been release without a plethora of issues still being present, ironically enough the alpha patch has been the best yet. which is nice, progress is being made.

But that is all rather off topic. I'm surprised there is no test team, as it sounds like there isn't.

SPUDLEY1977 · #8 05-15-2012, 01:43 PM

There are no testers - if you do not want to pay for testing - do not purchase the game. If you purchase the game you are a paid tester but you are sill testing on an unknown island unto yourself.

It is apparent there are only a few folks involved with programming for this game. It is not supported.... as the original IL-2 Series so do not expect same. It is an entirely different cadre and not at all like the group who worked the original series. One year after release and they have not delivered the program as promised. The Sequel BOM, battle over moscow, battle over money ,,,will be same as they are starved for cash. Since IL-2 we have not seen a refined product sold to consumers. This is not IL-2.

We the consumers are very disappointed and suprised as well.

Good luck

GraveyardJimmy · #9 05-15-2012, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MadTommy

But that is all rather off topic. I'm surprised there is no test team, as it sounds like there isn't.

Blacksix has stated there is. Here are some quotes (since you ignored the last post I made to suit your agenda):

Quote:

The testing is going good.

Quote:

responsible for the parts of the patch that are fully tested and working

Quote:

the current beta version of the patch didn't pass internal test and was sent back for revision.

Quote:

Test is going well. We don't have CTD on our PCs.

Quote:

It's going into wide internal testing today, which will last through the weekend and probably a couple of days more.

There are just a few which show they have an internal testing team, even if it is the developers themselves. You can find these yourself if you search posts by blacksix, it took less than 5 minutes.

Blackdog_kt · #10 05-15-2012, 01:46 PM

Actually i'm with Sith on this one. What you say effectively translates to "i want only the final patch".

Sith says "you have the option to not install the intermediate testing patches and wait for the final".

It doesn't make any difference whether the alpha is public or not: in both cases you don't install the alpha patch.

The fact that you can doesn't mean you have to, if it contradicts your wish not to test it.

In fact, the main differences between the two approaches (what we have and what you suggest) are:

1) with the current approach you have an option, with the one you suggest you don't and
2) public testing = more testers = statistically more probable for issues to be encountered = bugs get discovered faster.

I really don't see how this is worse than internal testing only.