Sign in to follow this  
Sputnik-1

Let's Not.

Recommended Posts

...I dont know why you quoted me when you said this. I said there is a difference between entitled whining, and voicing a valid concern, even though both have the same final point. What you said is SQUAD lures people in with functional demo's into buying a buggy full alpha release. I fail to see the link here.

Unless you are attempting an example at the latter of the two choices, in which case, yes I can see why this might lead to complaints, but there is no shortage of reviews, info, youtube videos, and a bug report section of the official forum to read and review before buying.

Now consider this. SQUAD moved themselves off the forum with the dev blogs and things like that, so you can scrap off the bug report section of the forum right away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. That's what makes people complain more. They will expect the full game to work like the demo (which it doesn't), giving them more room to complain.

I don't see how that makes any sense. Like my brain seriously can't even compute it. It's like error. Alpha means alpha, doesn't matter if the demo works better. It's an earlier version, that had it's bugs fixed o.o. To think no bugs will pop up with newer versions is probably one of the dumbest things I ever heard. If someone really has an issue with that, then purchase the game when it's done and not in development. It's an alpha for a reason.

If a person doesn't know what alpha means ... that is their own fault. If they get confused because the demo works well, and a later version with new features has bugs, then they shouldn't be an alpha tester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See my post above, though I'll be the first to admit a lot of bugs slipped through we simply don't have the time to build large spacestations during testing and even if we do we may use different techniques and not switch vessels during construction. Remember that the test team consists of volunteers and not paid full-time employees.

Yeah, but that doesn't excuse from the demo argument and wrong expectations. As for the test team argument, it's simple to solve: Hire more testers or create a initial testing methodology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see how that makes any sense. Like my brain seriously can't even compute it. It's like error. Alpha means alpha, doesn't matter if the demo works better. It's an earlier version, that had it's bugs fixed o.o. To think no bugs will pop up with newer versions is probably one of the dumbest things I ever heard. If someone really has an issue with that, then purchase the game when it's done and not in development. It's an alpha for a reason.

If a person doesn't know what alpha means ... that is their own fault. If they get confused because the demo works well, and a later version with new features has bugs, then they shouldn't be an alpha tester.

I fail to see how demoing the game and buying it because of the demo has anything to do with being an alpha tester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
See my post above, though I'll be the first to admit a lot of bugs slipped through we simply don't have the time to build large spacestations during testing and even if we do we may use different techniques and not switch vessels during construction. Remember that the test team consists of volunteers and not paid full-time employees.

Just to extend on this, I used to be part of the original test team, but then I discovered I simply do not have the time to devote to this game just to bug test. I have work and school and a fiancee and life in general to juggle. I used to spend hours every day with this game and not see half of the bugs that were being reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, but that doesn't excuse from the demo argument and wrong expectations. As for the test team argument, it's simple to solve: Hire more testers or create a initial testing methodology.

The fact that the game is alpha means the testers are us. I believe there are enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's most definitely not "hard" science, it's simply complex. The two are not interchangeable; most of this sort of thing is governed by the basic equations of physics, just in ways that are too complex for a person to resolve in their head.

KSP is not the real world. The simulation already knows EXACTLY how much force is necessary to hold the rocket steady, because it calculated that force to determine how much the rocket would rotate sans ASAS. Your computer, by definition, knows everything important to the calculation. So no, I don't believe it's impossible for KSP's stabilization to use something more intelligent than the current setup, and it'd be far closer to the NASA reality than anything we have now.

Exactly! that was my sense of it as well. The challenge of the problem is not information, it might be a cpu resource concern or simply a low priority. Obviously there are mods for improved control (mechjeb). As a user I would prefer a better stock attitude control system, it would save a bunch of rcs fuel if nothing else.

Thanks for the information Payload; interesting stuff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now consider this. SQUAD moved themselves off the forum with the dev blogs and things like that, so you can scrap off the bug report section of the forum right away.

You're losing me faster and faster. I thought you were making good points till this point. The two or three times I've made a post in the bug report section is was handled quickly and successfully. One of the times was even a problem with me not updating my drivers, and had nothing to do with the game. Still they helped with all the friendliness in the world.

The dev blogs are really just highlighted threads started by the developer. This is why they have comments sections, and the devs reply to comments and concerns. If anything they're placed front and center so they can easily be found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The reason the bug tracker has shielded parts is so that users don't post there and overload the developers.

So make actually posting on it require registration (that the devs make on a closed-testing basis, it's not that hard for most systems) but make viewing it available to everyone.

The bugtracker basicly acts as a funnel for bugs. About keeping people informed: I try best I can but most of the information about testing is covered by a non-disclosure agreement and this has to do with discussions about which bug to fix and which not as they would slow down the testing progress.

I think you really need to loosen up in terms of the NDAs. This is a game in development, with customers that have already paid for the game, and a general feature set that has already been publicly announced. If you want to keep stuff like merchandising, certain major developments like expansions or a detailed career mode layout, or the source code NDA, that's totally fine. All I'm asking for is more transparency in a game development model that relies on it.

Let's say you have to push resources back. Instead of saying "resources have been pushed back indefinitely, we're under NDA so we can't say more", you can say "resources have been pushed back due to issues x, y, and z, but once we spend time developing groundwork features m and n, as well as integrate other features such as a and b, then we shouldn't find any more significant problems that stand in our way."

That is basic accountability and transparency towards customers. Heck, I'd say that the only reason Dwarf Fortress has lasted so long with such a patient fan base is because Toady makes amazingly transparent dev logs detailing his progress, any bugs, and any reasons for delays every few days.

It's not much to ask.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As answered to KasperVld's post, the problem starts with the demo. I still question why it's not the same version of the current retail and a much more (all things considered) stable version. That gives people all right to complain after playing the demo and deciding to buy the game. They weren't technically paying for the same game to begin with. That creates wrong expectations.

Yeah, I just got Ninjaed. I just disagree. I don't think it gives people little right to complain. 0.18.3 was built on a somewhat optimized build of a game that is in heavy development. When 0.20 came about there were big changes to the way the game works; that is why I suspect there are many bugs. When I bought the game 0.16 was around the corner. Remember that version had a pretty serious fuel bug that only required like 5 keystrokes to fix (I am exagerating, but it was a simple fix nonetheless) and yet we had to wait like 2-3 months for it to be fixed. I wasn't discouraged, I was annoyed or ashamed. I worked around it. I did everything full throttle and then later I installed the mod that fixed that issue. I was actually happy that I got to play with bigger parts and spaceplanes! I suspect it is similar to how people who play the demo now will feel. They go from a relatively stable but limited game, to a somewhat less stable but almost infinitely larger and more complex game. Is it annoying if it might be a little buggier yes. Would it suck if you are one of the few individuals who can't play the game OH YES. But C'est la vie I say. I feel bad for them, but if the update worked for most people (as I suspect it did) and those issues are being worked on for 20.1 then I think it is a success.

I fully expect and understand that there will be bugs during alpha development. However, that "just an alpha" argument loses a lot of its meaning when:

There are scheduled 'releases' instead of nightlies or stables.

Said 'releases' have 1-2 weeks of testing by an apparently crack QA team supposedly hand-picked for bug-reporting.

Customers are kept in the dark about what exactly got fixed and detected by the QA team since the experimentals/internal bug tracker is kept secret and representatives (such as Skunky) tend to fly off the handle when said issues are brought up.

Enormous and apparently obvious bugs like the recent lander-can/cupola explosion issues, the lagtastic oceans, and mismatched terrain/ocean levels on Laythe were apparently glossed over in the QA periods, and then barely get acknowledged and are never mentioned until after they get fixed.

Transparency and just keeping people in the loop helps enormously. Stuff like Harv's recent "we found what was making things explode, we're fixing it now" and "the issue was fixed and was surprisingly easy once we found what was causing it" was well-handled. Note how he never said "deal with it, it's an alpha" or "it's to be expected, it's an alpha" or "we'll deal with it when it's a beta", he just acknowledged the problem and fixed it once the bug was pinpointed.

True. There are some release schedules and such, and there is a test team, but as I am sure you are aware, this is because of the issues that used to happen before 0.15 came out in which people would get really antsy and disappointed when truly horrible atom bomb size bugs were released. Those are screened now. As far as the "it's just an alpha argument", I am starting to think it is an oversimplification of what people mean. The point is that things are not only expected not to work, but expected to be fixed as well. The fact that Harv said, in effect, "Yeh we gonna fix it" shows that they are working on the game. Still, I do think a little more transparency would help with some of the unease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fail to see how demoing the game and buying it because of the demo has anything to do with being an alpha tester.

You are an alpha tester because you just are. The game is an Alpha. What else would you call yourself?

The fact you purchased it only got you the game cheaper, and allows you to play the game and alpha tester it before it's release. No matter how you look at it, you are an alpha tester.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, but that doesn't excuse from the demo argument and wrong expectations. As for the test team argument, it's simple to solve: Hire more testers or create a initial testing methodology.

The wrong expectations come from not paying attention. I don't mean to be rude but when you buy in development software (new) bugs are to be expected. Like I said you'll most likely get similar performance out of 0.20.1 or 0.20.2 as you'll get from the demo. To hire more testers is up to Squad but I can tell you that whatever methodology you chose you will keep missing bugs.

And on that note I think we should end the discussion about the development process since that is not what this thread is about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we've gone well off-topic again, I don't see an issue with the demo. It's simple and feature limited, and as the purpose of the demo is to demonstrate what the game is about in order to drum up interest and attract potential buyers, just having rockets and a few common parts works well to establish KSP. And then, you have the youtube videos, the pictures on the forum, the announcements of the new update content, and other forms of media to present the final/current build.

A buggy demo would hurt more than help, so the only thing that makes any sense at all is releasing demos based on very solid builds.

Edited by Shrike42
rephrasing for clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're losing me faster and faster. I thought you were making good points till this point. The two or three times I've made a post in the bug report section is was handled quickly and successfully. One of the times was even a problem with me not updating my drivers, and had nothing to do with the game. Still they helped with all the friendliness in the world.

The dev blogs are really just highlighted threads started by the developer. This is why they have comments sections, and the devs reply to comments and concerns. If anything they're placed front and center so they can easily be found.

But that doens't mean anyone will go to look at those in the first place before reporting anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again people. Stop the development discussion. This thread is about the community.

(topic lock for one minute)

Edited by KasperVld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ITT: people who don't like something (bugs/alpha "excuse"/Minecraft/lack of transparency/voices not being heard/voices being heard too much) and feel that their view is the best (if not the only) one to have. Not sure how many minds have been changed here in this thread but it seems like people are pretty passionate about their viewpoints...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ITT: people who don't like something (bugs/alpha "excuse"/Minecraft/lack of transparency/voices not being heard/voices being heard too much) and feel that their view is the best (if not the only) one to have. Not sure how many minds have been changed here in this thread but it seems like people are pretty passionate about their viewpoints...

It's pretty much like 99% of discussions go. One part is relentlessly trying to convince the other that their view the only right point of view while the other part does the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again people. Stop the development discussion. This thread is about the community.

(topic lock for one minute)

Thanks for sticking with us through this roller coaster of a thread :sticktongue:

On that note, I for one am amazed with this community. The passion people show for the game and the field is astonishing. This is one of the reasons that it is the only online community I have ever been about. I don't think it will ever become the Minecraft forums. I will at least try to do my part to avoid it.

It's pretty much like 99% of discussions go. One part is relentlessly trying to convince the other that their view the only right point of view while the other part does the same.
ITT: people who don't like something (bugs/alpha "excuse"/Minecraft/lack of transparency/voices not being heard/voices being heard too much) and feel that their view is the best (if not the only) one to have. Not sure how many minds have been changed here in this thread but it seems like people are pretty passionate about their viewpoints...

I've had my viewpoint shifted a bit. I also don't think I was trying to convince anyone of anything. I have always found the point of discussion and debate not to be the total capitulation of one party to the other but rather the interchange of ideas in an open forum so that everyone might be shifted at least somewhat, if even only at a subconscious level.

Edited by AmpsterMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The passion and stubbornness is good and bad at the same time. Good because it means we love this game, and bad because it means we love this game.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure how many minds have been changed here in this thread but it seems like people are pretty passionate about their viewpoints...

People on all sides of the discussion all have one thing in common that they are passionate about, and that is KSP and seeing it do well. The OP, myself and others expressed some concerns about the potential direction the community is heading in, and any potential damage on the game this may cause. I think this has been one of the best threads I've seen in a while because (for the most part) it's been very calm and civil.

It's been interesting to read people's differing views about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The passion and stubbornness is good and bad at the same time. Good because it means we love this game, and bad because it means we love this game.

Agreed. I think a lot of us could stand to read what others write and consider it thoughtfully, then respond in kind. It results in much better threads, from what I've seen. I'm trying my best to do that in here.

Sidebar: Why is there no "donate beer to developer" button on the storefront? I always coded better buzzed in college....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this has been one of the best threads I've seen in a while because (for the most part) it's been very calm and civil.

It's been interesting to read people's differing views about it.

Yup, it's why I have pretty much just spent my whole night reading and contributing to it. When discussions like these happen in the forums, it's when I realize that the community is alive and kicking. When we have Mods like KasperVid who have pretty much just stuck with this thread and done temporary locks and cleanup when needed but not permalocks, it shows that the mods really are awesome. I guess it's why I am not to afraid about the community going down hill, ironically, because of this thread. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agreed. I think a lot of us could stand to read what others write and consider it thoughtfully, then respond in kind. It results in much better threads, from what I've seen. I'm trying my best to do that in here.

Sidebar: Why is there no "donate beer to developer" button on the storefront? I always coded better buzzed in college....

I agree as well, but feel people need to learn when to just let certain things go. There are times when you may feel your views are perfectly valid, but when you begin to notice it's not reaching anyone ears, you have to realize maybe it's just you. All the explaining in the world why your views are correct will not solve anything if barley anyone agrees. Just have to know when that point is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, you are starting on the path of development discussion again. Posts have been removed :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this