These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP, Singularity and You: How we can all make better use of the test servers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sarmatiko
#61 - 2012-06-03 16:43:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarmatiko
I wonder if CCP can make something like auto-generated (means this will not consume developers time, except initial scripting) diff logs for client changes (static data comparison between previous and current builds) at least for internal use.
Because sometimes looking at diff logs (before TQ, before Sisi even better) can prevent happening of things like accident deletion of collectibles (Mine BPO's, rare drones etc) or latest bug with marauders shield bonus.
With logs responsible testers or bughunters can at least doublecheck in time: "Omg why they removed eliteBonusViolatorsShieldBonus2 from Vargur and changed it for unimplemented eliteBonusMarauderShieldBonus2? Probably bug, let's fix it!"
Onyx Nyx
The Veldspar Protectorate
#62 - 2012-06-03 17:41:52 UTC
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?

It seems to me that a majority of the issues with he inventory are things that they found out about during development, but never got around to fix due to deadlines.

I kill kittens, and puppies and bunnies. I maim toddlers and teens and then more.

  • Richard (http://www.lfgcomic.com/)
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#63 - 2012-06-03 17:53:09 UTC
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#64 - 2012-06-03 17:58:30 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.

With the old launcher you could at least tell what files have changed to we know what to test but with the new launcher unless you devblog or post about it. A change you made to missions, NPE, CC, or CQ could stay untested very easily.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#65 - 2012-06-03 17:59:09 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.



Would publishing the details of items or UI changes/improvements made on Duality be considered an option, prior to the transfer to SIS? Or perhaps at a minimum, furnishing the more prolific and helpful users of SISI with said data?

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
Sarmatiko
#66 - 2012-06-03 18:08:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarmatiko
Salpun wrote:
With the old launcher you could at least tell what files have changed to we know what to test but with the new launcher unless you devblog or post about it. A change you made to missions, NPE, CC, or CQ could stay untested very easily.

You can always use Repair tool to see which parts of files have changed. Also this information not always correlate with actual changes - you can see only changes in client structure.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#67 - 2012-06-03 18:08:43 UTC
Cutter Isaacson wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.



Would publishing the details of items or UI changes/improvements made on Duality be considered an option, prior to the transfer to SIS? Or perhaps at a minimum, furnishing the more prolific and helpful users of SISI with said data?

Duality has not been used a lot lately. The internaly dev server which they use to build Sisi builds and TQ builds has a name i cannot remember right now. It is not open to the public and is not tracked by http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/server_status.php.

CCP is going to virtual machines soon so some things will not touch a game configured server before it hits Sisi and maybe not even then as the number hitting Sisi is a developement build and what is hitting TQ in the same day is a TQ build.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#68 - 2012-06-03 18:10:23 UTC
Sarmatiko wrote:
Salpun wrote:
With the old launcher you could at least tell what files have changed to we know what to test but with the new launcher unless you devblog or post about it. A change you made to missions, NPE, CC, or CQ could stay untested very easily.

You can always use Repair tool to see which parts of files have changed. Also this information not always correlate with actual changes - you can see only changes in file structure.

True but its an extra step that a person wishing the info has to set up for and is not 100% accurate as you stated.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Superpooper
SHITLORDS
#69 - 2012-06-03 18:18:32 UTC
Waste of time to test, CCP needs to ask war gaming how they can get 20k players on the test server...

Hell I got PAIED for alpha testing WoWp... did not know I would going in... but still PAIED? Ya with IG gold who cares... gold can only be got with RL money.

Ya so paied to test a F2P game...

Nothing at all for testing a sub game... AND what you say not listened to because of deadlines...

So long as they want to pump out crap you are wasting your time going on the test server to test for ccp.
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#70 - 2012-06-03 18:38:08 UTC
Salpun wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.

With the old launcher you could at least tell what files have changed to we know what to test but with the new launcher unless you devblog or post about it. A change you made to missions, NPE, CC, or CQ could stay untested very easily.


I have posted the full changes as soon as the staging branch was on Sisi for the last 2 releases. Is that what you are referring to?

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#71 - 2012-06-03 18:39:11 UTC
Superpooper wrote:
Waste of time to test, CCP needs to ask war gaming how they can get 20k players on the test server...

Hell I got PAIED for alpha testing WoWp... did not know I would going in... but still PAIED? Ya with IG gold who cares... gold can only be got with RL money.

Ya so paied to test a F2P game...

Nothing at all for testing a sub game... AND what you say not listened to because of deadlines...

So long as they want to pump out crap you are wasting your time going on the test server to test for ccp.


Keep your negative attitude out of this constructive thread please.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#72 - 2012-06-03 18:42:31 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Salpun wrote:
CCP Goliath wrote:
Onyx Nyx wrote:
If CCP values our input and feedback that much, wouldn't they (and us players) benefit from invite us onto duality or whatever, tell us about this feature that they just put there that is in its rawest form and tell us to break it?.


I'm not sure what you mean? Sisi features are that in my mind. If you mean earlier in the development cycle, we do extensive inhouse testing for that so no gain would be made by public exposure.

With the old launcher you could at least tell what files have changed to we know what to test but with the new launcher unless you devblog or post about it. A change you made to missions, NPE, CC, or CQ could stay untested very easily.


I have posted the full changes as soon as the staging branch was on Sisi for the last 2 releases. Is that what you are referring to?

Yes that was a great improvement Lol keep it up. The fast release cycle right now is keeping alot of the sisi testers off becouse there is not a lot to test. It goes directly to TQ for the main player base to comment on. So we are staying quite now waiting for the next thing that needs our comments and feedbackTwisted

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#73 - 2012-06-04 00:12:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Yonis Kador
Cutter Isaacson wrote:


This is part of the problem we are discussing Josef. I have been an avid fan of Tippia and his posts for over 5 years. I find him to be insightful, forthright and intelligent. That said, even the brightest diamond will not shine if it is buried 6 feet deep in manure.

Only instead of wasting a Dev's time with flagging and what not, get the CCL member to mark the best posts for immediate perusal and then put the others in to "piles", at the same time the CCL member could also remove the less helpful posts from the thread and keep it clean. After a few months of this, certain people will have then built up a "rep" as helpful posters and at THAT point Dev's will be able to select their posts first.




Cutter,

You just stated that diamonds "won't" shine in a "pile."

Though I frequently agree with you, here, I think caution is in order. I agree that you're spot on with the whole "diamond in the rough" analogy. In fact, players who aren't forum regulars, and who haven't been programmed yet to think a certain way will probably offer up the most novel, unorthodox suggestions. Vets will continue to offer great feedback to improve existing gameplay, but it's those diamonds in the rough that will challenge standardized ways of doing things.

IMO, even an internal list of "reps" being used as a measure of value, should be actively discouraged. Not only would public knowledge of such "reps" damage the perception of fairness and value each player expects when they offer a suggestion, but consistency isn't guaranteed and a suggestion's value is of its own volition. You don't want a situation to arise where the best idea ever isn't read for weeks because the player didn't have a rep. The function of the CCLs is to filter ideas, not players. Now, I freely admit, that in a single hour on the forum, a complete stranger can identify the tone, construction, and flow of an intelligent, polite player. Despite EVE's appeal to brainy professionals, they seem to be outnumbered here. But there should be an expressed expectation that if a suggestion passes CCL perusal, it's worth reading.

Any talk of secret lists of the "best" members, lists of who's opinions carry "more" value, who's got the best "rep," etc. (even if it's human nature) is a very slippery slope to make policy. I got stuck there when I read that part. The potential for abuse just smacks of good ole' boy politics and in the wrong hands, could undermine public relations with the community. Pragmatism aside, it is critical that each and every player believes their opinion matters.

Yonis Kador
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#74 - 2012-06-04 10:21:57 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:


This is part of the problem we are discussing Josef. I have been an avid fan of Tippia and his posts for over 5 years. I find him to be insightful, forthright and intelligent. That said, even the brightest diamond will not shine if it is buried 6 feet deep in manure.

Only instead of wasting a Dev's time with flagging and what not, get the CCL member to mark the best posts for immediate perusal and then put the others in to "piles", at the same time the CCL member could also remove the less helpful posts from the thread and keep it clean. After a few months of this, certain people will have then built up a "rep" as helpful posters and at THAT point Dev's will be able to select their posts first.




Cutter,

You just stated that diamonds "won't" shine in a "pile."

Though I frequently agree with you, here, I think caution is in order. I agree that you're spot on with the whole "diamond in the rough" analogy. In fact, players who aren't forum regulars, and who haven't been programmed yet to think a certain way will probably offer up the most novel, unorthodox suggestions. Vets will continue to offer great feedback to improve existing gameplay, but it's those diamonds in the rough that will challenge standardized ways of doing things.

IMO, even an internal list of "reps" being used as a measure of value, should be actively discouraged. Not only would public knowledge of such "reps" damage the perception of fairness and value each player expects when they offer a suggestion, but consistency isn't guaranteed and a suggestion's value is of its own volition. You don't want a situation to arise where the best idea ever isn't read for weeks because the player didn't have a rep. The function of the CCLs is to filter ideas, not players. Now, I freely admit, that in a single hour on the forum, a complete stranger can identify the tone, construction, and flow of an intelligent, polite player. Despite EVE's appeal to brainy professionals, they seem to be outnumbered here. But there should be an expressed expectation that if a suggestion passes CCL perusal, it's worth reading.

Any talk of secret lists of the "best" members, lists of who's opinions carry "more" value, who's got the best "rep," etc. (even if it's human nature) is a very slippery slope to make policy. I got stuck there when I read that part. The potential for abuse just smacks of good ole' boy politics and in the wrong hands, could undermine public relations with the community. Pragmatism aside, it is critical that each and every player believes their opinion matters.

Yonis Kador


Belief aside, every players' opinion does matter. We do not use and have no plans to use a rating system of any kind (though internally we occasionally war over who gets the most likes, but that's devs not players :P)

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
#75 - 2012-06-04 10:39:30 UTC
Bonjour CCP Goliath : )

Thanks for the response. Even though it was only suggested, when I read that in the thread, I wanted to take the point to task. But I never really suspected it could be policy. If someone has a good idea, it's a good idea.

Warring over forum "likes" sounds like great inter-office fun!

So who's in the lead? Punkturis? haha

Yonis Kador
CCP Goliath
C C P
C C P Alliance
#76 - 2012-06-04 10:57:32 UTC
Yonis Kador wrote:
Bonjour CCP Goliath : )

Thanks for the response. Even though it was only suggested, when I read that in the thread, I wanted to take the point to task. But I never really suspected it could be policy. If someone has a good idea, it's a good idea.

Warring over forum "likes" sounds like great inter-office fun!

So who's in the lead? Punkturis? haha

Yonis Kador


I think it's Guard? Community tend to get tons of likes by posting announcements :) Punkturis is in 2nd place IIRC.

CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
Disdaine
#77 - 2012-06-04 11:09:17 UTC
Modules taking damage without overheating? Reported early, still made it live.

Lag with new inventory? Reported early, still happening.

Posting in CCP apologist / fanboy thread.
Cutter Isaacson
DEDSEC SAN FRANCISCO
#78 - 2012-06-04 12:23:59 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Yonis Kador wrote:
Cutter Isaacson wrote:


This is part of the problem we are discussing Josef. I have been an avid fan of Tippia and his posts for over 5 years. I find him to be insightful, forthright and intelligent. That said, even the brightest diamond will not shine if it is buried 6 feet deep in manure.

Only instead of wasting a Dev's time with flagging and what not, get the CCL member to mark the best posts for immediate perusal and then put the others in to "piles", at the same time the CCL member could also remove the less helpful posts from the thread and keep it clean. After a few months of this, certain people will have then built up a "rep" as helpful posters and at THAT point Dev's will be able to select their posts first.




Cutter,

You just stated that diamonds "won't" shine in a "pile."

Though I frequently agree with you, here, I think caution is in order. I agree that you're spot on with the whole "diamond in the rough" analogy. In fact, players who aren't forum regulars, and who haven't been programmed yet to think a certain way will probably offer up the most novel, unorthodox suggestions. Vets will continue to offer great feedback to improve existing gameplay, but it's those diamonds in the rough that will challenge standardized ways of doing things.

IMO, even an internal list of "reps" being used as a measure of value, should be actively discouraged. Not only would public knowledge of such "reps" damage the perception of fairness and value each player expects when they offer a suggestion, but consistency isn't guaranteed and a suggestion's value is of its own volition. You don't want a situation to arise where the best idea ever isn't read for weeks because the player didn't have a rep. The function of the CCLs is to filter ideas, not players. Now, I freely admit, that in a single hour on the forum, a complete stranger can identify the tone, construction, and flow of an intelligent, polite player. Despite EVE's appeal to brainy professionals, they seem to be outnumbered here. But there should be an expressed expectation that if a suggestion passes CCL perusal, it's worth reading.

Any talk of secret lists of the "best" members, lists of who's opinions carry "more" value, who's got the best "rep," etc. (even if it's human nature) is a very slippery slope to make policy. I got stuck there when I read that part. The potential for abuse just smacks of good ole' boy politics and in the wrong hands, could undermine public relations with the community. Pragmatism aside, it is critical that each and every player believes their opinion matters.

Yonis Kador


Belief aside, every players' opinion does matter. We do not use and have no plans to use a rating system of any kind (though internally we occasionally war over who gets the most likes, but that's devs not players :P)



I would just like to point out that a rating system was NOT my idea, I was merely responding to a previous posters idea.

"The truth is usually just an excuse for a lack of imagination." Elim Garak.
CCP Punkturis
C C P
C C P Alliance
#79 - 2012-06-04 22:13:04 UTC
CCP Goliath wrote:
Yonis Kador wrote:
Bonjour CCP Goliath : )

Thanks for the response. Even though it was only suggested, when I read that in the thread, I wanted to take the point to task. But I never really suspected it could be policy. If someone has a good idea, it's a good idea.

Warring over forum "likes" sounds like great inter-office fun!

So who's in the lead? Punkturis? haha

Yonis Kador


I think it's Guard? Community tend to get tons of likes by posting announcements :) Punkturis is in 2nd place IIRC.


I'm working on it!!!!
1st CCP Guard 2,439 Likes
2nd CCP Punkturis 2,388 Likes

♥ EVE Brogrammer ♥ Team Five 0 ♥ @CCP_Punkturis ♥
Culmen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#80 - 2012-06-04 22:33:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Culmen
The problem with CCP taking feedback is that bittervets are probably the majority users of the test server.
Thus it's impossible to distinguish a small segment of bittervets whining and something that is going to be hated by the majority of EVE, at least while it's at the test server phase.

For example:
I started a thread on the new UI the day it went live on the test server.
Most of the gripes and simple fixes that CCP is now starting to implement were voiced in that thread.
Mean while the dev blog thread was stuffed with people say "WOW! SO COOL!".

So its 10 people who are probably biased bittervets vs 100 people who are only seeing the surface.

Really the best way to get around this is to hide changes behind a check box, thats defaulted to on.
Though that has the hazard of people de-selecting it for purposes of familiarity rather than the feature itself being broken.

There is a fine line between a post and a signature.