Latest Patch HURRICANES NOT STARTING AGAIN???

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Catseye

Geeze Chivas,
"If you understood the beta process . . . . . "
I really think that you have a reading comprehension issue . . . . or a communication problem wherin you are not able to prepare a sentence or comment without insulting the intelligence of the other posters. You assume so many things about others without facts.

You just don't get it! The beta process is to eliminate problems. If problems are re-introduced, they are caught as a part of the process of evaluation of the changes made before giving it to the testers. You check your work!! It's not up to the testers to check the programmers work!

The startup issue is not just a minimal issue. It is a game-breaker issue! Who the heck was asleep at the wheel on this one?

If you are going to play around with the mixture settings, one would think that someone went through the process of checking to see if the aircraft would start or even fly and that the mixture settings really worked in action.

I'm putting this one to bed. The issues speak for themselves.

When you wake up, asks some friends what beta testing is. Then you might not be so incredulous when you find errors and bugs, while beta testing.

[furbs]

Originally Posted by Chivas

When you wake up, asks some friends what beta testing is. Then you might not be so incredulous when you find errors and bugs, while beta testing.

Chivas, i find most of your posts pretty fair and reasonable, even if a little "rose tinted" but on this issue i think your just being blinkered and stubborn.

Its ok to say the devs made a mistake, they wont cry.

In the process of coding the mixtures and start up procedure, the person making the changes must of a some point said "its done, finished Luthier"

How did they know they had "finished" with out testing the changes he/she made?

You make changes to the start ups but dont try and start the planes yourself in game?

Come on Chivas...

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by furbs

Chivas, i find most of your posts pretty fair and reasonable, even if a little "rose tinted" but on this issue i think your just being blinkered and stubborn.

Its ok to say the devs made a mistake, they wont cry.

In the process of coding the mixtures and start up procedure, the person making the changes must of a some point said "its done, finished Luthier"

How did they know they had "finished" with out testing the changes he/she made?

You make changes to the start ups but dont try and start the planes yourself in game?

Come on Chivas...

I have to agree here there can be but one explanation, the work was not tested.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by furbs

Chivas, i find most of your posts pretty fair and reasonable, even if a little "rose tinted" but on this issue i think your just being blinkered and stubborn.

Its ok to say the devs made a mistake, they wont cry.

In the process of coding the mixtures and start up procedure, the person making the changes must of a some point said "its done, finished Luthier"

How did they know they had "finished" with out testing the changes he/she made?

You make changes to the start ups but dont try and start the planes yourself in game?

Come on Chivas...

Anything could have happened after/if the guy tested the start procedure, the lead programmer may have optimized code in one feature, and that change could have porked another feature. Thats the whole point of releasing another beta patch for the community to test. If they could test everything, they wouldn't bother sending the beta to the community, they'd just send it to Steam when they finished, but we'd be waiting alot longer for the Steam RC.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Well, sent some crash dumps to them if that is of any help. Had first crash for ages now and it actually generated a dump file.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Anything could have happened after/if the guy tested the start procedure, the lead programmer may have optimized code in one feature, and that change could have porked another feature. Thats the whole point of releasing another beta patch for the community to test. If they could test everything, they wouldn't bother sending the beta to the community, they'd just send it to Steam when they finished, but we'd be waiting alot longer for the Steam RC.

Chivas. Please stop talking about what you consider to be normal in the software development life cycle. I've been in software testing and QA for 14 years and I can tell you that even from the outside they simply aren't testing this software. They aren't even smoke testing it before firing it out to us. Them telling us it's in beta testing is just lip service and you are just swallowing it, they are buying time but for me that time is just about up.

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Unbelievable.....If it were the Release Candidate it would be sent to Steam for download. This is still a beta patch of a possible RC path, sent out to the community for testing.

Incorrect.. Release Candidate.. is just that a candidate. Not a release version.

Originally Posted by Chivas

When you wake up, asks some friends what beta testing is. Then you might not be so incredulous when you find errors and bugs, while beta testing.

The patch released was released under the title " Friday, September 28 - Patch Release Candidate and Su-26!".

You are just making an assumption to suit your own ends.

Why you feel the need to defend the presence of glaring bugs is not easy to understand. Let the bug be reported and move on.

If you understood software development you would know that development starts, then an alpha build is generated, this progresses to a beta build. In both these stages the developers know bugs will exist. But to a lesser extend in beta than alpha. Then when the developer hopes has has solved all the bugs a RC is released to receive feedback and to catch any bugs that remain. The bugs in a RC are normally hard to find and only located when the software is put out to a very number of users.

I'm sorry but not being able to start a plane in a plane simulator is NOT an bug that should be in a RC or even a beta patch. That is something that should not make it out of alpha stage.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

I'm sorry but not being able to start a plane in a plane simulator is NOT an bug that should be in a RC or even a beta patch. That is something that should not make it out of alpha stage.

+1. It's just that.

Now the fanboys can PLEASE tell me if i can start RAF fighters engines?

[yobnaf]

Originally Posted by LoBiSoMeM

+1. It's just that.

Now the fanboys can PLEASE tell me if i can start RAF fighters engines?

You have to follow the instructions step by step. Hurricane and Spitfire were well known for having problems with starting the engine. So it's realistic now in this great sim, player have to learn how to use the planes correctly.

[JG53Frankyboy]

Originally Posted by yobnaf

You have to follow the instructions step by step. Hurricane and Spitfire were well known for having problems with starting the engine. So it's realistic now in this great sim, player have to learn how to use the planes correctly.

its almost 18 month ago i looked in the Readme of the game, what page was it again ?