Latest Patch HURRICANES NOT STARTING AGAIN???

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

Which is why I urge them to reply to this thread:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=34643

+1 replies appreciated in the above thread. MP

No point in Beta testing and bug reports if they are not even read!

Exactly how do you know they aren't reading the test reports.

[Force10]

Originally Posted by Chivas

when some will never understand the development process.

I guess I have been thinking of the developement process wrongly then. I was under the impression when you spend a month or two fixing bugs in the code...say fixing a mixture issue...you would then internally test your fixes by jumping in a plane and checking it. If someone had spent 1 hour to just jump in the planes and attempt to start them, they might have noticed a problem.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Force10

I guess I have been thinking of the developement process wrongly then. I was under the impression when you spend a month or two fixing bugs in the code...say fixing a mixture issue...you would then internally test your fixes by jumping in a plane and checking it. If someone had spent 1 hour to just jump in the planes and attempt to start them, they might have noticed a problem.

Again I'm not aware of the priorities they gave their beta test team. If they thought they could find every bug they wouldn't bother sending out a beta for us test. If you don't think its complicated, try recreating the Battle of Britain on a computer, and let me know how you make out. You could elicit some help from Rowans BOB developers and the dedicated WOV BDG group developers/modders. The sim has been a WIP for the last 15 years and still trying to find away to develop a working multiplayer or even add an aircraft.

Originally Posted by Force10

I guess I have been thinking of the developement process wrongly then. I was under the impression when you spend a month or two fixing bugs in the code...say fixing a mixture issue...you would then internally test your fixes by jumping in a plane and checking it. If someone had spent 1 hour to just jump in the planes and attempt to start them, they might have noticed a problem.

Yes I agree 100%, I have raised this previously, it seems that no-one test any of the patches before release, its truly incredible that after already releasing a patch where u couldn't start an aircraft they then repeat it and once again introduce as many bugs as they have fixed - but old bugs??? Its ameteur work.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Force10

I guess I have been thinking of the developement process wrongly then. I was under the impression when you spend a month or two fixing bugs in the code...say fixing a mixture issue...you would then internally test your fixes by jumping in a plane and checking it. If someone had spent 1 hour to just jump in the planes and attempt to start them, they might have noticed a problem.

i think the whole context is a little different in this case

as was already stated over 9 months ago, work on CoD had/has essentially stopped, and their main focus was rebuild/create a new gfx and game engine while simultaneously working on BoM. if BoM is not released on schedule this time and proves to be a relative success, then the whole project and series is folded and they close their doors (have a guess at the amount of whining then, and the glee and joy from people like tree)

the last beta patch, and largely this current RC, are primarily the beta introduction of the major progress milestones of the new gfx engine, with a few critical fixes for CoD added (like the CTD's etc). the "comprehensive fix of major CoD problems" has/is not included in this, there are some partially tested and some quick hurried CoD fixes included, but most of that hasnt gone through an orderly in-house testing process (which the gfx engine fixes have by all indications)

my main concern is that the cluster of perpetually negative people here (not you specifically) and the disgruntled and frustrated newcomers swept up in that mindset, are so limited in only spewing out aggressive and rude "negative feedback" , that as a result it will collectively be responsible for missing the boat in getting the many badly needed fixes for CoD included in the final patch. what we should instead be focused on is to present the major bugs and missing features (AI not working etc..) in a way that makes it easier for luthier to deal with and setting priorities in their fixes (dont expect him to wade through long winded threads that are full of bickering and negative jibes, neither expect him to go looking at other websites to get "outside" input. its largely up to the russian and english CoD forum users to provide them with that information in a way that makes it easier for luthier, and at least for our forum it is obvious this does not exist (no idea what the russian forum is like)

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Again some people miss the whole point of releasing a Beta patch for Testing. If the development had the resources and every computer setup known to man they wouldn't release a BETA patch for the community to test. The devs must roll their eyes is disbelief when someone jumps up and down yelling.... I FOUND A BUG AND I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW STUPID THE DEVS ARE. But then again they already understand the negative side of involving the community when some will never understand the development process. I'm sure the good has outweighed the bad and they will continue to use our resources to help build the series.

Agreed 100%

[Catseye]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Again some people miss the whole point of releasing a Beta patch for Testing. If the development had the resources and every computer setup known to man they wouldn't release a BETA patch for the community to test. The devs must roll their eyes is disbelief when someone jumps up and down yelling.... I FOUND A BUG AND I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW STUPID THE DEVS ARE. But then again they already understand the negative side of involving the community when some will never understand the development process. I'm sure the good has outweighed the bad and they will continue to use our resources to help build the series.

Hi Chivas,
Beta patches are to test and correct issues - not to re-introduce already fixed issues. If you are implying that I do not understand the development process, let me clarify for you. I've been in senior IT management for many years at the corporate level, including the development of very large business programs from scratch. I know very well the issues involved with the technical side, the business side and managing customer as well as executive expectations. You should witness some of the inside SHOUTING that happens when deliverables are not met that impact the organizations bottom line.

As a client, I don't really care what issues the techs are having, nor is the client expected to. What I and clients expect is a deliverable on time and on or under budget. To that end, I've managed processes and lead teams establishing and following guidelines to measure, check and adjust issues to ensure that the deliverable is met. Ic apparently do not have these procedures in place as evidenced by the quality of their releases of beta patches wherein previously resolved show stopper issues are re-released.

Please don't expand my post to one of omg as you put it, or imply that I stated that , "I FOUND A BUG AND I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW STUPID THE DEVS ARE". because that was not stated not was it implied. What was indicated in caps was a very specific portion of a title and in my opinion justified. Note: the text inside was in upper and lower case. CAPS in a heading do not necessarily indicate shouting. It is an indication to draw attention. A complete posting in CAPS is shouting! Big difference. So to that end you have mis-interpreted or assumed an incorrect tone in the original post.

I also believe that open beta testing is not the way to go. Closed groups have been shown to be more efficient at producing timely and effective results. Having limited resources is not an excuse for a flawed deliverable. If the checks and balances are in place, it would mitigate the client reaction you are now seeing.

The good does outway the bad. But the bad is very bad. As for the Devs utilizing our resources as beta testers . . . . . there are a lot of issues put forth by the "testers" with many questioning if the Devs really look at them. I like the term "using" because that is exactly what is taking place. We are being used!

I sincerely hope for the success of this series. I do hope that they get the funding to proceed. I look forward to participating in online events with large groups. But my patience has run out! 1C is the team that has cried "Wolf" far too many times and made too many promises too many times for me to meekly accept what is being dished out.

I miss OLEG!

Originally Posted by Catseye

Hi Chivas,
Beta patches are to test and correct issues - not to re-introduce already fixed issues. If you are implying that I do not understand the development process, let me clarify for you. I've been in senior IT management for many years at the corporate level, including the development of very large business programs from scratch. I know very well the issues involved with the technical side, the business side and managing customer as well as executive expectations. You should witness some of the inside SHOUTING that happens when deliverables are not met that impact the organizations bottom line.

As a client, I don't really care what issues the techs are having, nor is the client expected to. What I and clients expect is a deliverable on time and on or under budget. To that end, I've managed processes and lead teams establishing and following guidelines to measure, check and adjust issues to ensure that the deliverable is met. Ic apparently do not have these procedures in place as evidenced by the quality of their releases of beta patches wherein previously resolved show stopper issues are re-released.

Please don't expand my post to one of omg as you put it, or imply that I stated that , "I FOUND A BUG AND I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW STUPID THE DEVS ARE". because that was not stated not was it implied. What was indicated in caps was a very specific portion of a title and in my opinion justified. Note: the text inside was in upper and lower case. CAPS in a heading do not necessarily indicate shouting. It is an indication to draw attention. A complete posting in CAPS is shouting! Big difference. So to that end you have mis-interpreted or assumed an incorrect tone in the original post.

I also believe that open beta testing is not the way to go. Closed groups have been shown to be more efficient at producing timely and effective results. Having limited resources is not an excuse for a flawed deliverable. If the checks and balances are in place, it would mitigate the client reaction you are now seeing.

The good does outway the bad. But the bad is very bad. As for the Devs utilizing our resources as beta testers . . . . . there are a lot of issues put forth by the "testers" with many questioning if the Devs really look at them. I like the term "using" because that is exactly what is taking place. We are being used!

I sincerely hope for the success of this series. I do hope that they get the funding to proceed. I look forward to participating in online events with large groups. But my patience has run out! 1C is the team that has cried "Wolf" far too many times and made too many promises too many times for me to meekly accept what is being dished out.

I miss OLEG!

Good post Cat, unfortunatley they cannot see the wood for the trees that they can fly through.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Catseye

Hi Chivas,
Beta patches are to test and correct issues - not to re-introduce already fixed issues. If you are implying that I do not understand the development process, let me clarify for you. I've been in senior IT management for many years at the corporate level, including the development of very large business programs from scratch. I know very well the issues involved with the technical side, the business side and managing customer as well as executive expectations. You should witness some of the inside SHOUTING that happens when deliverables are not met that impact the organizations bottom line.

As a client, I don't really care what issues the techs are having, nor is the client expected to. What I and clients expect is a deliverable on time and on or under budget. To that end, I've managed processes and lead teams establishing and following guidelines to measure, check and adjust issues to ensure that the deliverable is met. Ic apparently do not have these procedures in place as evidenced by the quality of their releases of beta patches wherein previously resolved show stopper issues are re-released.

Please don't expand my post to one of omg as you put it, or imply that I stated that , "I FOUND A BUG AND I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW STUPID THE DEVS ARE". because that was not stated not was it implied. What was indicated in caps was a very specific portion of a title and in my opinion justified. Note: the text inside was in upper and lower case. CAPS in a heading do not necessarily indicate shouting. It is an indication to draw attention. A complete posting in CAPS is shouting! Big difference. So to that end you have mis-interpreted or assumed an incorrect tone in the original post.

I also believe that open beta testing is not the way to go. Closed groups have been shown to be more efficient at producing timely and effective results. Having limited resources is not an excuse for a flawed deliverable. If the checks and balances are in place, it would mitigate the client reaction you are now seeing.

The good does outway the bad. But the bad is very bad. As for the Devs utilizing our resources as beta testers . . . . . there are a lot of issues put forth by the "testers" with many questioning if the Devs really look at them. I like the term "using" because that is exactly what is taking place. We are being used!

I sincerely hope for the success of this series. I do hope that they get the funding to proceed. I look forward to participating in online events with large groups. But my patience has run out! 1C is the team that has cried "Wolf" far too many times and made too many promises too many times for me to meekly accept what is being dished out.

I miss OLEG!

If you understood the beta process you would realize that past issues can come back when the devs are constantly rewriting and adding code. Again its the whole point of releasing another beta test patch, and not the final patch.

I like Oleg as much as the next guy, and also wish he hadn't left, but highly doubt the project would be much further along. Oleg would let the community know what the development was trying to achieve far more than Luthier, with the caveat that this is a WIP and features would be added when system resources allowed during the series. People still don't seem to understand that, proven by all the "you promised" posts. Luthier has learned its better to say very little. Yes the development sold the sim without mentioning its still a beta, but that doesn't change the fact that its still a "Beta".

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Its your right to disagree, but that doesn't make you right. I don't know why people can't understand the complexity of the task. If the game was "finished" and it was just a matter of fixing bugs it would be an easier task, BUT they are not just fixing bugs, they are also optimizing code, and adding code to further refine features. ANY code change whether its to optimize, fix bugs, or finish features, can cause bugs in related and unrelated ways. The developers obviously sent out another beta patch to the community, not an RC to Steam, to help test and find bugs, why people are incredulous when they do find them is beyond me. Its frankly quite disconcerting, you gotta hope they are just trolling.

Chivas, they won't send "an RC to Steam" at all. That will be the actual release, not a release candidate. Alpha > Beta > Release Candidate > Release. Pretty straightforward.

A plane that doesn't start in a flight sim is about as obvious an error as it is conceivable to think of whether it be beta, RC or a final release. Starting the planes is kind of the point of a flight sim, isn't it?

But this is just pointless semantics. It will (hopefully) be fixed so what does it matter? I doubt anyone is shocked by the ineptitude of the dev team so the discussion will have little impact.