F86 Engine Sound is Gone! - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-12-2014, 07:21 PM   #21
Flagrum
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: r/hoggit
Posts: 6,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjohnson241 View Post
So, Testing found the problem, reported it and ED released anyway?
Why did that happen?
"Timing".

You can not "just squeeze one more bug fix" into a relase at any arbitrarily point in time. If you would, you would never ever releasy anything. Therefore you need to "draw a line" - fixes that are ready by then go into the release, the others go into the next.

So, why wasn't this issue fixed first so it would make it into the release?

"Priorities".

You can not... well, I bet, you get the gist already. :o)
Flagrum is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 08:16 PM   #22
bkthunder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flagrum View Post

You can not "just squeeze one more bug fix" into a relase at any arbitrarily point in time.
Although it seems they always find the time to squeeze in new bugs that weren't there before, and break things that used to work.
bkthunder is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 08:49 PM   #23
Flagrum
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: r/hoggit
Posts: 6,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkthunder View Post
Although it seems they always find the time to squeeze in new bugs that weren't there before, and break things that used to work.
The chit chat forum with the "funny stuff?" thread is over there - this thread is meant to be a bit more serious, afaik.
Flagrum is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:00 PM   #24
jjohnson241
Member
 
jjohnson241's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Alexandria (Mt. Vernon) Va
Posts: 635
Default

I don't find anything funny about this thread.
What is suggested is that the going forward with the Release is a priority above testing and "bugs" identified.'
So why test?
__________________


3rd Mar Div
RVN '66-'67
jjohnson241 is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:25 PM   #25
bkthunder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flagrum View Post
The chit chat forum with the "funny stuff?" thread is over there - this thread is meant to be a bit more serious, afaik.
I'm glad you find it funny, I actually think it's pretty sad.

What I don't get is this: BST hasn't added anything with this patch, so it's not like they were so busy testing new features / fixes that this one slipped. Instead, a very noticeable sound bug has been introduced into their very latest module. Now, one would think that they at least gave some attention to their latest release, but of course this seems to be left rusting with the other modules while they work on yet something else.
bkthunder is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:31 PM   #26
johnv2pt0
Member
 
johnv2pt0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjohnson241 View Post
I don't find anything funny about this thread.
Neither do I or many others. Belsimtek, there is a huge pool of seething anger building over your products. I really hope you guys right this ship before people stop buying on principal alone.

I love the F-86 so this is disappointing.
johnv2pt0 is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:32 PM   #27
Buzzles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Europe
Posts: 2,640
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjohnson241 View Post
I don't find anything funny about this thread.
What is suggested is that the going forward with the Release is a priority above testing and "bugs" identified.'
So why test?
Because patching a commercial project is generally a pretty big thing to do. There's often a lot of work that goes into it in various forms before the code can be build, the building of the patch package itself can be quite intensive and time consuming, then you've got the actual testing time both internal and external, and then setting up the systems to distribute that patch.
It's never just "click go and it's ready".

Do you remember the last patch? A number of people, myself included, couldn't actually patch at all as there was an issue with the file manifest that only cropped up if the SU-25T training missions were installed.

In the bigger view of this game, the sheer amount of files and code, missing one sound effect (or the correct reference to it) in a single module that has no actual negative side affect for the rest of the game is not a big thing.

Noticable, yes, but a under development terms a blocker or critical issue? Not in the slightest.

There's also the financial side of a patch as well as it takes employee time and therefore money. ED aren't massive, they might have some dedicated testers, but I doubt they've got a dedicated release team whose only job is to compile and release new versions, ergo each patch will have a financial cost associated with it. If it cost you say $2500 (made up number) to build, test and release a patch and the biggest problem was a missing sound effect, would you choose to double the cost and time taken, or release "as is" especially knowing another patch scheduled for a few weeks time?

Last edited by Buzzles; 11-12-2014 at 09:36 PM.
Buzzles is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:37 PM   #28
Flagrum
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: r/hoggit
Posts: 6,199
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jjohnson241 View Post
I don't find anything funny about this thread.
What is suggested is that the going forward with the Release is a priority above testing and "bugs" identified.'
So why test?
Nor do I find this thread funny - as I already explicitely expressed in my posting.

What are you proposing here? That only patches should be released when all identified bugs are fixed? Really? Do you prefer to wait x months until all is done and then you get your patch or do you prefere to wait x months with patches every few weeks until the backlog of bugs is completed?
Flagrum is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:40 PM   #29
bkthunder
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,164
Default

Are we talking about ED or BST here? Doesn't BST have a tester?
Seriously, if anyone at BST had taken ONE flight with the F-86 while the patch was in beta, they would have noticed that sound was missing.

Now tell me, for "just a missing reference to the sound file" in the code (something they already fixed internally) was it worth it to open up yet another can of worms? Considering all the heat they're getting for lacking updates...
bkthunder is offline  
Old 11-12-2014, 09:42 PM   #30
cofcorpse
ED Partners
 
cofcorpse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkthunder View Post
What I don't get is this: BST hasn't added anything with this patch.
Why are you so rude? Why do you think that BST didn't add anything? Such things happen, unfortunately.

It has been said that issue will be fixed with next update.
cofcorpse is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:51 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.