These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Expressing concerns about the reliability of Service
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Atticus Fynch
#21 - 2011-12-30 14:51:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Atticus Fynch
Pteranodon wrote:
Atticus Fynch wrote:
Pteranodon wrote:

I think this expectation may fail because of the continuous start up issues, rounds of endless patching & the same old general reliability issues.


Question: When has it ever been any different? You basically described business as usual for EVE. Endless patches? It's called "development."



I agree. However, should patches move the game forward?

There have been many instances where the patches have moved the game backwards or worse broke it.


Patches are more akin to "maintenance" which is never ending.

"Releases" give the game direction. Move the game "forward"....or "backwards" as with Incarna.

What's best is that it's also free so dont look a gift horse in the mouth.

[b]★★★Cargo Pilots Unite!!!★★★ https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=668132&#post668132[/b]
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#22 - 2011-12-30 14:59:06 UTC
Pteranodon wrote:
I agree. However, should patches move the game forward?
Not really, no. Patches should fix things without (hopefully) breaking to much of the old stuff, but in any reasonably complex system, it's bound to happen.

So the question remains: when has it ever been any different? You basically described business as usual for EVE.
Kalin Trose
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2011-12-30 15:31:01 UTC
Ok im gonna stand up for the OP here because it seems that the guys replying are either deluded or plain stupid.

In simple terms for those that need it.

Recently Hilmar made this awesome very public apology and then took us on this wonderful story about how he wants and demands perfection from here on in.

That perfection has not happened.

Yes GMs are active on the boards but that's pretty much the only thing that's been bettered.

This update has indeed brought numerous great things, new ships, new CQ but its also brought in patch after patch after patch after patch to fix the small things that :

SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ON SISI FIRST

I wonder do CCP use the TEST SERVER for there fail patchs before they take them to TQ?

Old players will not come back to this, there is too much wrong with the game and that's a shame.

Why cant CCP make a patch that doesn't need fixing? Answer is for such a small mouth you've taken on more than you can chew.
Hung TuLo
Running with Dogs
Northern Coalition.
#24 - 2011-12-30 15:38:31 UTC
Ah, so the brother of the IDIOT stands up to defend the OP with even more rabble on how he would do things and how things should work.

SO you really know how things work??????????

Kalin stand up and take a bow....






"In space all warriors are cold warriors" ---  General Chang  Star Trek VI
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#25 - 2011-12-30 15:54:53 UTC
I demand that CCP immediately CEASE AND DESIST with their fixes and improvements to the game.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)
Kalin Trose
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-12-30 15:56:04 UTC
I know enough to suggest that CCPs strive for exellence is failing and sub numbers are dropping..

Dropping subs generally means people are leaving the game so.......why is that?

Updates have to be tested and tested until they are deemed perfect enough to go onto TQ.

Does CCP have a quality control department?

The fail begins on allowing flawed content onto a live environment, this is what SISI is for and should be utilized for this purpose. If this happened sub numbers would cease to drop and most likely increase.

If CCP cannot lower the workload per update to get it right the first time they need to hire more people to accomodate said workload. Instead they just fired alot of its staff.

That makes sense....oh wait

I just think CCP are getting it wrong in a big way on the small things.

For the love of god, make an update, get it on sisi and test the living hell out of it with a fine tooth comb. When the quality control team says its ok then release it to TQ.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#27 - 2011-12-30 15:57:07 UTC
Kalin Trose wrote:


SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ON SISI FIRST

I wonder do CCP use the TEST SERVER for there fail patchs before they take them to TQ?



Dude - get out of the forums now. Get the **** OUT.
Your ******** reply makes my eye cry and my soul burn. I don't wanna see your face or your failed arguments here again.

HTFU & GTFO
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#28 - 2011-12-30 16:01:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Kalin Trose wrote:
Recently Hilmar made this awesome very public apology and then took us on this wonderful story about how he wants and demands perfection from here on in.
Again, not really, no… He made an apology where he said the priority would be EVE, and that has happened.

The stability has improved incrementally and the new micro-patches have allowed for far better deployment of new fixes. Server issues can and will happen — business as usual.
Quote:
Dropping subs generally means people are leaving the game so.......why is that?
Two years of neglect. They've only had two months of trying to reverse that so far.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#29 - 2011-12-30 16:06:41 UTC
ITT we just start making **** up and roll with it.


Man, I cant believe they buffed the drake on that last patch. Now no bitter vets will make trial accounts.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Kalin Trose
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2011-12-30 16:12:33 UTC
Tippia, Yeah ok so your spot on.

But what I'm thinking is that a patch should be perfect when its released. The fact that these updates need multiple patchs right away is wrong.

CCP must know that they're releasing poor game fixs or they'd be no need for patch after patch the same week the update was deployed.

I don't see the reason to not use sisi to perfect an update before deployment.

Its like they have everything they need at there disposal yet dont use it.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#31 - 2011-12-30 16:23:25 UTC
Pteranodon wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:
*you're an idiot


Please explain why I'm an idiot- enlighten me or are you just bored and had to write something?


Because you made a thread called "expressing the concerns of reliable service" and then failed to cite the unreliability like a true ********.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#32 - 2011-12-30 16:28:17 UTC
OP >>>>>>>>>>>>

Don't expect anything resembling an intelligent response this time of the year.

As you can see, the CHILDREN are out of school and bored until they return.

Pretty much no dialogue right now....and only Thread De-Railings RULE the day.

Roll for SURE......

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Taiwanistan
#33 - 2011-12-30 16:47:37 UTC
tldr i want space barbies and beach house

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."
Skyla Kavatina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2011-12-30 17:22:11 UTC
Kalin Trose wrote:
This update has indeed brought numerous great things, new ships, new CQ but its also brought in patch after patch after patch after patch to fix the small things that :

SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ON SISI FIRST



For starters Sisi is a fraction of the size of TQ and has a fraction of the users on it at any one time.

As a software developer I know it's impossible to test anything 100%. You can test a system as much as you like but once Joe Public get his mits on it he'll find something that you missed or do something that wasn't anticipated.

How many of you have spotted the interesting bug with the strip miner beams? It's actually been there for a while but you will know what it is if you have. Big smile
Zag'mar Jurkar
Les chevaliers de l'ordre
Goonswarm Federation
#35 - 2011-12-30 17:45:44 UTC
Kalin Trose wrote:
Ok im gonna stand up for the OP here because it seems that the guys replying are either deluded or plain stupid.

In simple terms for those that need it.

Recently Hilmar made this awesome very public apology and then took us on this wonderful story about how he wants and demands perfection from here on in.

That perfection has not happened.




Perfection is Relative.
Alpheias
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#36 - 2011-12-30 18:03:18 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
Alpheias wrote:
Pteranodon wrote:
Bumblefck wrote:
*you're an idiot


Please explain why I'm an idiot- enlighten me or are you just bored and had to write something?


You can't enlighten a moron.

Good day, sir!

amar enlighten everyone, even morons. Tachyon beam laser + gleam, done.


I was more thinking in the lines of Judgement, the Amarrian doomsday weapon.

Agent of Chaos, Sower of Discord.

Don't talk to me unless you are IQ verified and certified with three references from non-family members. Please have your certificate of authenticity on hand.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#37 - 2011-12-30 19:14:40 UTC
+1 for in-game bug report tool on TQ

use it...

I even reported a display issue with the agent finder being caused by an epic arc agent
::proud::

I would have otherwise noted it as some slightly annoying thing in my head only to be forgotten 10 minutes later...and if that memory lasts any longer then that then I probably wouldn't be arsed to make the bug report still.

Now the in-game bug report tool takes care of a lot of the technical stuff for us and even has a screenshot system to help highlight what exactly is going wrong.

Also what exactly is wrong with a patch every day if it means no more in convenience then maybe entering your password twice. Are you one of the poor souls that has god awful internet that **** up every single patch? Well sorry about that, hope you can find a long term solution, but quick blaming CCP for it damnit like they have some shody deployment system, if it works for 90% of us it's probably on your end.

Moral: what's wrong with patches?

"They break more then they fix"
So you'd rather leave the other stuff broken

"They need better QA"
That may be, but do you have any idea how much testing they'd have to do to cover EVERY case in a system with as many variables in EVE? They'd still be testing expansion A by the time they have to come out with expansion B.

And they already have the odds stacked against them in terms of who finds the bugs first, the 100s of 1000s of users all doing different things? Or the the team of 100 (when CCP is less then 600 total, 100 of them being testers sounds silly so it's probably not even that many) working on specific tests for a few hours?

And then there's the infinite number of hardware configurations that change how things work.

Just file the damn bug reports and shut up >.<

The Drake is a Lie
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#38 - 2011-12-30 19:36:50 UTC
Xercodo wrote:
Just file the damn bug reports and shut up >.<


Not empty quoting, and a like of course! :)
Taedrin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2011-12-30 19:44:44 UTC
OP: Crucible wasn't meant to attract new customers, it was meant to stop the hemorrhaging of customers after The Summer Of Rage. IIRC, Crucible was actually pushed through with a mere 6 weeks of development time. This is why we don't really see any "big" features released this expansion. I expect that we won't see any "big" new features until the next expansion. Please note that these features will be improvements on already existing game mechanics.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#40 - 2011-12-30 19:47:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
People have little patience for threads like this, as most have been here long enough to know that in THIS single shard environment there is only so much QC that can be done prior to patch release. Things that were fine on SISI, under normal load there, can break instantly on TQ.

On a related note, the frequent small patches are a result of player feed back. CCP used to wait until they had a large patch put together that covered several issues. However that left us dealing with those issues for a longer period of time waiting for the patch, and if something went wrong it was more difficult for them to isolate the cause and correct it due to the number of fixes implemented.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Previous page123Next page