Working for SQUAD? :-)

[qzgy]

35 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

However it's still a practice that not all agree with. Some may permit it but from my experience with this community, the answer of "let the community bug test it" usually results in people complaining about buying a complete product to only find out it's broken.

What if they had Open optional bug testing? Like an early soft-release preview (that has to be selected and called something like 1.N.T (for testing)) or something for bug testing accessible to the community with a very clear statement that this is NOT a final product and is expected to have bugs? Best of both worlds it would seem....

 

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Edited April 20, 2018 by qzgy

[ZooNamedGames]

4 minutes ago, qzgy said:

What if they had Open optional bug testing? Like an early soft-release preview (that has to be selected and called something like 1.N.T (for testing)) or something for bug testing accessible to the community with a very clear statement that this is NOT a final product and is expected to have bugs? Best of both worlds it would seem....

 

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Then that would work fine. It would be fine to have the less stable versions be available to those interested. The complaints mostly stem from players who bought the game off of places like Steam or Gog assuming it was a complete and stable product, only to be met with the game crashing on load, crafts experiencing major physics bugs or the game out right being broken as we've seen in the past.

[Lisias]

10 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

However it's still a practice that not all agree with. Some may permit it but from my experience with this community, the answer of "let the community bug test it" usually results in people complaining about buying a complete product to only find out it's broken.

Being the exact reason why such development model has *two* branches released to the public: the *beta testing*, and the "stable release". Users willing to help use the beta-testing release (and are rewarded somehow). Users that don't want to be bored with this stuff uses the previous stable release.

Frankly, it's not a choice anymore. *Every* Software Company does it nowadays, from Microsoft to Red Hat.

Software became too big and too complicated for a dedicated Q/A and Q/C team - no one can afford this anymore. Even 15 years ago, at my times as Siemens Mobile (indirect) contractor, Q/A and Q/C teams were already shared between *a lot* of projects worldwide.

For the good and for the evil, it's something we must get used somehow.

[ZooNamedGames]

1 hour ago, Lisias said:

Being the exact reason why such development model has *two* branches released to the public: the *beta testing*, and the "stable release". Users willing to help use the beta-testing release (and are rewarded somehow). Users that don't want to be bored with this stuff uses the previous stable release.

Frankly, it's not a choice anymore. *Every* Software Company does it nowadays, from Microsoft to Red Hat.

Software became too big and too complicated for a dedicated Q/A and Q/C team - no one can afford this anymore. Even 15 years ago, at my times as Siemens Mobile (indirect) contractor, Q/A and Q/C teams were already shared between *a lot* of projects worldwide.

For the good and for the evil, it's something we must get used somehow.

But KSP isn’t Windows 10, installed on over 10,000,000 Computers world wide. It’s a new practice for video games as I can buy a range of console games that aren’t broken in their off the shelf version.

[pandaman]

17 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

But they probably aren't looking for 20yos with rather lackluster experience (although with a colorful resume) and only now entering college. If these problems wouldn't knock me down, I'd apply in a heartbeat, no, in a planck second.

You won't know unless you actually ask.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.  You have nothing to lose by applying, so if you are genuinely interested then go for it.  If you apply with a level headed attitude that you may not fit the requirements then there's no need to feel disappointed in yourself if you don't make it, and you put yourself 'on the radar' too.

[ZooNamedGames]

2 hours ago, pandaman said:

You won't know unless you actually ask.  Nothing ventured, nothing gained.  You have nothing to lose by applying, so if you are genuinely interested then go for it.  If you apply with a level headed attitude that you may not fit the requirements then there's no need to feel disappointed in yourself if you don't make it, and you put yourself 'on the radar' too.

Well I guess that’s true. With my only comment being that I’ll go in with a realist mindset, and a positive response to Squad.

[Snark]

18 hours ago, qzgy said:

What if they had Open optional bug testing? Like an early soft-release preview (that has to be selected and called something like 1.N.T (for testing)) or something for bug testing accessible to the community with a very clear statement that this is NOT a final product and is expected to have bugs? Best of both worlds it would seem....

They have tried something a lot like that in the past-- "experimentals" is what they called it.  Usually fairly closed to a somewhat limited subset of users, but at least at one point they had a more "open" experimentals that essentially threw open the door to anyone who chose to participate.

It's somewhat mixed.  On the one hand, you get lots and lots and lots of eyes on the game.  On the other hand, they're not QA professionals (which means their bug reports aren't going to be as high-fidelity as a professional's would be), and also most of them are just going to be playing the game to have fun (i.e. their motivation is more "give me shiny stuff sooner, and I'm okay with bugs" rather than "I'm actively bug-hunting").

So it's not quite a no-brainer.  Opening the doors that way gives more eyeballs, but they're lower-skilled eyeballs that don't necessarily have the "QA motivation".  And it does come at a cost to the game developer:  now they have to spend extra cycles sifting through huge volumes of feedback that has a fairly low signal-to-noise ratio.

Not to mention the fact that it's entirely possible for a developer to have some marketing / IP concerns where they want to have a big "unveiling" and don't want to tip their hand about content beforehand.  Companies can change their mind about that sort of thing over time (for example, based on results from trying it).   Plus, of course, KSP's acquisition from T2 means that it would be T2 rather than Squad making that sort of decision, and they may very well have very different ideas about whether they want to do that sort of thing or not.

TL;DR:  This is not a bad idea.  But from the developer's perspective, it has disadvantages as well as advantages; and it's not a slam dunk that the benefits would outweigh the costs in every case.

[Lisias]

7 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

But KSP isn’t Windows 10, installed on over 10,000,000 Computers world wide. It’s a new practice for video games as I can buy a range of console games that aren’t broken in their off the shelf version.

Neither Netscape was at that time.

And, speaking frankly, a friend of mine just bought God of War 4 (launching day!), got straight to home and then had to download a 1.2G update before playing. And the damn thing started to sell TODAY.

It's not a new practice in the game industry for years now. It's just not called by its true name.

As I already had said, we have no choice as to get used to it and learn how to deal with it.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

19 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

That may be true but you forgot the backlash such a decision had. Players don’t want to be bug testers; players want to play the game. Not find bugs.

As the kids today say: wat. There are plenty of people here (including me) that tested and reported bugs/gave feedback during the beta periods, I recall the 1.2 beta being particularly fruitful. Some of us masochists actually enjoy it. IMO the freestyle nature of KSP kind of demands a pretty chaotic testing phase- having testers "that know what they are doing" is not always the best route because they can stay in the same patterns.

[ZooNamedGames]

2 hours ago, Lisias said:

Neither Netscape was at that time.

And, speaking frankly, a friend of mine just bought God of War 4 (launching day!), got straight to home and then had to download a 1.2G update before playing. And the damn thing started to sell TODAY.

It's not a new practice in the game industry for years now. It's just not called by its true name.

As I already had said, we have no choice as to get used to it and learn how to deal with it.

And those who don’t want to QnA for Squad, complain and demand a money back for a broken product and I sympathize with them. It may be common, but so is Ubisoft’s track record of releasing broken unstable products. 

2 hours ago, Waxing_Kibbous said:

As the kids today say: wat. There are plenty of people here (including me) that tested and reported bugs/gave feedback during the beta periods, I recall the 1.2 beta being particularly fruitful. Some of us masochists actually enjoy it. IMO the freestyle nature of KSP kind of demands a pretty chaotic testing phase- having testers "that know what they are doing" is not always the best route because they can stay in the same patterns.

And not everyone agrees with that mindset. Some people just want to buy a game and want it to work. Not stop and report to the developers all their problems.

[ZooNamedGames]

———

 

I’m going to finish with two statements and move on as I’m not eager to get tied into a debate that mostly comes down to opinion on the industry.

First, I don’t own any current generation game consoles and the majority of my games are pre-2010, and I have no intention of changing that because personally when I buy a game, I want to buy a game, not a development project where I report a bug and cross my fingers and hope the developers fix it in the next patch. When I bought games as a kid I was paying money expecting a complete and stable product. If I would’ve received the kind of mess that is “acceptable” in the industry today, I would’ve returned those games for my money back.

Secondly, this is an opinion. One that I’ve seen shared before. People complaining about expecting a stable game and not this mess of broken physics, crashes and lag spikes that render the game literally unplayable (and therefore, a $30-$40 purchase, effectively equal to throwing your money in the trash can). However what is the most important factor here is this is an opinion. To each of us is our own thoughts and mine, does not approve and can promise not a dollar to any major game developer beyond Squad.

Edited April 21, 2018 by ZooNamedGames

[Lisias]

17 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

I’m going two finish with two statements and move on as I’m not eager to get tied into a debate that mostly comes down to opinion on the industry.

A good opinion is firmly based on facts. At least me was debating your view of some facts, and not your opinion about them.

Of course, you are entitled to your own opinion, and no one should try to change your opinion based only on his own. But we can talk about facts, and the facts you brought to the table demanded some corrections.

[DeliriumTrigger]

On 4/18/2018 at 12:01 AM, invision said:

C#.........okay

 

Now for the obligatory question...  does KSP djent?

[fireblade274]

@invision WhY DO THeY AlwAyS SeND ThE PoOR!?!?!?!?

[Vanamonde]

This thread seems to have left its topic far behind. Time to move on.