Quote: Originally posted by dahsdebater on 6/08/2010I can't believe that people are still complaining about the beta testing.  There were 2 causes for the "failure" of the beta testing:1.  They didn't run it on the primary servers.  THey could have run a much better schedule had they shut down the game for a month or 2 to beta test the new engine.  Would you have liked that better?  I seriously doubt it.2.  Nobody paid the same kind of attention that they do when it counts.  Case in point, the problems with the PBP that arose immediately upon the new engine applying to active worlds.  Obviously nobody was seriously and thoroughly reading the play-by-plays in the test world.  No amount of beta testing would add that kind of incentive that can be gained by having it count.

Quote: Originally posted by ardthomp on 6/08/2010

Quote: Originally posted by dahsdebater on 6/08/2010I can't believe that people are still complaining about the beta testing.  There were 2 causes for the "failure" of the beta testing:1.  They didn't run it on the primary servers.  THey could have run a much better schedule had they shut down the game for a month or 2 to beta test the new engine.  Would you have liked that better?  I seriously doubt it.2.  Nobody paid the same kind of attention that they do when it counts.  Case in point, the problems with the PBP that arose immediately upon the new engine applying to active worlds.  Obviously nobody was seriously and thoroughly reading the play-by-plays in the test world.  No amount of beta testing would add that kind of incentive that can be gained by having it count.

In response to #1 - that is exactly what a test website is for. To put it on the main servers. If you are saying that they did not do this, then that further lets us know that this was botched from the start.

Quote: Originally posted by hughesjr on 6/08/2010The bottom line is, there may be a dozen distributed machines that handle the 9 different simulation games that WIS runs.

It is not like a facebook website to maintain.

Quote: Originally Posted By 4green2 on 6/08/2010SO when a COmputer game comes out, do you demand a refund if it has a patch

Quote: Originally posted by antonsirius on 6/08/2010Maybe it's just a matter of perspective, but I wouldn't call what we're dealing with right now in the engine "bugs".

Game results aren't being lost in the aether. We aren't seeing scores of 326 to -8. When you schedule another school for next season, it goes in the correct slot in your non-con schedule. When you recruit a player, you get the results you selected and paid for, for the correct price. When you change a setting or a distribution number, the page doesn't crash. Those would be bugs.

Engine settings that determine, for instance, what the cost in fatigue is for running FCP, or the odds of making a three point shot with all else being equal... those aren't bugs. They're variables to be tweaked until the engine outputs are within the parameters the developers want them.

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 6/08/2010Maybe it's just a matter of perspective, but I wouldn't call what we're dealing with right now in the engine "bugs".

Game results aren't being lost in the aether. We aren't seeing scores of 326 to -8. When you schedule another school for next season, it goes in the correct slot in your non-con schedule. When you recruit a player, you get the results you selected and paid for, for the correct price. When you change a setting or a distribution number, the page doesn't crash. Those would be bugs.

Engine settings that determine, for instance, what the cost in fatigue is for running FCP, or the odds of making a three point shot with all else being equal... those aren't bugs. They're variables to be tweaked until the engine outputs are within the parameters the developers want them

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 6/08/2010Maybe it's just a matter of perspective, but I wouldn't call what we're dealing with right now in the engine "bugs".

Game results aren't being lost in the aether. We aren't seeing scores of 326 to -8. When you schedule another school for next season, it goes in the correct slot in your non-con schedule. When you recruit a player, you get the results you selected and paid for, for the correct price. When you change a setting or a distribution number, the page doesn't crash. Those would be bugs.

Engine settings that determine, for instance, what the cost in fatigue is for running FCP, or the odds of making a three point shot with all else being equal... those aren't bugs. They're variables to be tweaked until the engine outputs are within the parameters the developers want them

Quote: Originally posted by sully712 on 6/09/2010Are you serious?  You dont think teams winning 83-33 against an evenly matched team is a bug?  You dont think winning by 51 at home and losing by 13 on the road is a bug?  You dont think teams making 55% of the 3pt shots is a bug?  I dont even know how to respond to that.

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 6/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by sully712 on 6/09/2010 Are you serious? You dont think teams winning 83-33 against an evenly matched team is a bug? You dont think winning by 51 at home and losing by 13 on the road is a bug? You dont think teams making 55% of the 3pt shots is a bug? I dont even know how to respond to that.

I never saw results like that under the old engine. Not as common as they are now. You are unbelievable. I dont understand why you can't admit there is a problem and it is a bug in the engine.
All of those things happened under the old engine. What a sucker you are, paying all that money for all those years to be a guinea pig for a buggy game

Quote: Originally posted by udm_mike on 6/09/2010Isn't this what beta testing was invented for? If they were minor tweaks, I'd agree with you. But the results we're seeing would have been information readily available to them with even the most rudimentary pre-release testing. Which, from all accounts, is about the nicest thing you could call the testing they did.

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 6/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by udm_mike on 6/09/2010 Isn't this what beta testing was invented for? If they were minor tweaks, I'd agree with you. But the results we're seeing would have been information readily available to them with even the most rudimentary pre-release testing. Which, from all accounts, is about the nicest thing you could call the testing they did.

We? The results I've seen personally in Smith are not at all wildly out of whack.

As for whether the things people are ******** about would have been fine-tuned better with more extensive beta testing... probably. But seble apparently didn't have the resources to do a full, multi-season beta, with a team of dedicated testers focusing on specific issues -- which is what it would have taken.

So, instead, we get a live launch with a product that about 95% to where seble wants it, and because of the code re-write seble is now able to react quickly once the 5% becomes apparent through game-play, rather than having those issues drag out through multiple seasons.

Does that make us beta testers? Not really.

Does that make the hysterical public freakouts we're seeing from the likes of mmt and sully justified? Not hardly

Quote: Originally posted by shagnew13 on 6/09/2010Then what prompts the developer of this so called new engine to make a stickied thread, where he wants his "paying customers" to send in, post the absurd results that they are having?Now if there weren't bugs at all then this wouldn't be a problem and he wouldn't have to ask for his customers to submit tickets, and post the results.

Quote: Originally Posted By antonsirius on 6/09/2010

Quote: Originally posted by udm_mike on 6/09/2010 Isn't this what beta testing was invented for? If they were minor tweaks, I'd agree with you. But the results we're seeing would have been information readily available to them with even the most rudimentary pre-release testing. Which, from all accounts, is about the nicest thing you could call the testing they did.

We? The results I've seen personally in Smith are not at all wildly out of whack.

As for whether the things people are ******** about would have been fine-tuned better with more extensive beta testing... probably. But seble apparently didn't have the resources to do a full, multi-season beta, with a team of dedicated testers focusing on specific issues -- which is what it would have taken.

So, instead, we get a live launch with a product that about 95% to where seble wants it, and because of the code re-write seble is now able to react quickly once the 5% becomes apparent through game-play, rather than having those issues drag out through multiple seasons.

Does that make us beta testers? Not really.

Does that make the hysterical public freakouts we're seeing from the likes of mmt and sully justified? Not hardly


I mean Apple doesn't roll out products that have bugs like this, Video Games don't roll out like this with bugs like this, they have a dedicated group of testers, and developers who fix, and tweak the game and software to where they want it, before it is rolled out, and if they don't fix them, they delay the launch. They issue patches because of hackers, and what not that find flaws in the game on purpose.

I mean to say the engine is at 95% complete is not really true, because he has had 2 major updates in what 2 weeks, and he has now posted a thread to ask for his customers help in identifying the problems they are seeing.

If he didn't have the resources to develop the product to where he wants it, then he should have delayed it, or did more beta testing before releasing the engine the way it was.

Yes he may be able to tweak it here and there to where he wants it, but this season is pretty much lost for all customers on the new engine, because they are trying to find out the bugs, and problems with this new engine, which they are actually paying for.