Would you PLEASE keep Live Updates on Test longer? (rant)

[FamilyManFir]

/rant onOkay, I understand, there was the deadline of the Bloodline Chronicles to consider. I'm sure that's why you tested Live Update #5 on the Test server for all of four days.However, please, <i>please, <b>please</b></i>, leave these big monster Live Updates on test for MORE THAN A WEEK from now on? Okay?Look at your track record. You tested LU#3 for all of four days and had major problems. You tested LU#4 for a week and a half and had a few small issues; and that update included the all-new Mentoring function which was a doozy to get right, but you got it right! You then tested LU#5 for all of four days and have major problems again, including breaking an entire Class (Summoners and their sub-classes are Not Happy right now as you've broken their pets), botching a new broken-combat mob behavior set (first invulnerable mobs, and now, a blast from the past, trains are back!), and other issues I probably don't know about.You have got to keep these LUs on Test long enough to TEST them and FIX things that show up. Please. Thank you./rant off

[Suraklin]

Amen

[aeio]

<div></div>Since they intend to bring them out every two weeks, they can't really keep them on test for more than a week. As far as I can tell a lot of stuff isn't even being caught on test due to the number of testers and the feedback from the testers... So having it on test longer wouldn't necessarily make the patches any better, they would just make the time between patches on live servers longer. Not sure I see the benefit there. I see several issues each patch that is noticeable right away on live and gets fixed in hot fixes, that apparently nobody on test noticed... I got to be honest I am not impressed with the feedback test servers generally provide.. They provide good very basic feedback, but in almost every game I have played they have had the same problem... Basic stuff is getting missed, and I am not sure why...  I think part of it is that people who play on test servers are not good testers... They play on test for other reasons. I am not here to bash the players on test, but like I said, every game I have played the same things have happened and it has happened here again.  Maybe it is because there are not enough people, or not high enough level or whatever... but like I said you go back and look at some of the feedback after the last patch went live and compare it to the feedback from the week before on the test server, and you won't see reported issues that didn't get fixed, you will see issues that were never noted. <div></div><p>Message Edited by aeiouy on <span class=date_text>03-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:41 AM</span>

[Rizzen19]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> aeiouy wrote:<BR> Since they intend to bring them out every two weeks, they can't really keep them on test for more than a week.<BR><BR>As far as I can tell a lot of stuff isn't even being caught on test due to the number of testers and the feedback from the testers...<BR><BR>So having it on test longer wouldn't necessarily make the patches any better, they would just make the time between patches on live servers longer.<BR><BR>Not sure I see the benefit there.<BR><BR><BR>I see several issues each patch that is noticeable right away on live and gets fixed in hot fixes, that apparently nobody on test noticed... I got to be honest I am not impressed with the feedback test servers generally provide.. They provide good very basic feedback, but in almost every game I have played they have had the same problem... Basic stuff is getting missed, and I am not sure why...  I think part of it is that people who play on test servers are not good testers... They play on test for other reasons.<BR><BR>I am not here to bash the players on test, but like I said, every game I have played the same things have happened and it has happened here again.  Maybe it is because there are not enough people, or not high enough level or whatever... but like I said you go back and look at some of the feedback after the last patch went live and compare it to the feedback from the week before on the test server, and you won't see reported issues that didn't get fixed, you will see issues that were never noted.<BR><BR><BR><BR> <P>Message Edited by aeiouy on <SPAN class=date_text>03-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>05:41 AM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Say what you really mean .. we're all friends here. </P> <P> </P> <P>THEY PLAY ON TEST TO FIND EXPLOITS SO THEY CAN .. WELL .. EXPLOIT THEM.</P>

[Mindgamer]

<FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff66 size=3></FONT> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Monday morning quarterback is always easy...made that TEST server toon yet? Oops...off to exploit another exploit...lets see...bank balance is about 7 gold...no horse...same old <BR>Graystone apartment...dam I need an exploit bad....</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3></FONT></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Agedone, 39th Mystic, TEST</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Guildleader, <Ancient Treachery></FONT></EM></DIV>

[Rizzen19]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Mindgamer wrote:<BR><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff66 size=3></FONT> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Monday morning quarterback is always easy...made that TEST server toon yet? Oops...off to exploit another exploit...lets see...bank balance is about 7 gold...no horse...same old<BR>Graystone apartment...dam I need an exploit bad....</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3></FONT></EM> </DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Agedone, 39th Mystic, TEST</FONT></EM></DIV> <DIV><EM><FONT face="Courier New" color=#66ff33 size=3>Guildleader, </FONT></EM></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>This is so poorly structured that I cannot tell who it's directed at .. but if it's directed at me I was clearly not talking about everyone that plays on Test. But if you think what I suggested above doesn't happen .. you're really, really quite naive.</P> <P> </P> <P>nice font by the way.</P>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>aeiouy wrote:Since they intend to bring them out every two weeks, they can't really keep them on test for more than a week.<hr></blockquote>Eh? Every two weeks? I thought their tentative schedule was more like a four-week rotation, with the LU being posted about a week-and-a-half before it was pushed to live. Where did you see the two-week number?<blockquote><hr>As far as I can tell a lot of stuff isn't even being caught on test due to the number of testers and the feedback from the testers...<hr></blockquote>Ah, but that's why you want it on Test longer. With fewer testers you need more time for said testers to catch problems, not to mention for them to check any fixes.I really breathed a sigh of relief after LU#4 when I saw the paucity of problems that cropped up. Sure, there was an emergency shutdown of the servers to correct the sell-back price of one item but that's relatively small. It's taking them days, if not weeks, to iron out the problems with this LU#5 that was pushed out the door too fast.With so many fixes still needed on Live you can't take the time to really test updates. That would require no less than a solid month of presence on Test before it went to Live, with developers prodding Test players to check out specific changes. However, FOUR DAYS on Test is worse than inadequete, it can give you a false sense of security when testers don't find problems ... becuase they haven't had the time to do so. Thus the kind of problems that we're seeing with LU#5 and thus my rant.

[Daffid011]

It is always a hard choice when testing.  To give public feedback about a bug to people who will turn it into a 10 page rant or to keep the information to ourselves so that we can exploit it.  Of course we aparently can't find bugs so this isn't a problem we face very often.  There, our dirty dirty secret is out in the open.  I surrender! <div></div>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Daffid011 wrote:It is always a hard choice when testing. To give public feedback about a bug to people who will turn it into a 10 page rant or to keep the information to ourselves so that we can exploit it. Of course we aparently can't find bugs so this isn't a problem we face very often. There, our dirty dirty secret is out in the open. I surrender! <div></div><hr></blockquote>While this was obviously (to me, at least) a sarcastic response to a rather insulting post, don't forget that you can always PM a bug you find to one of the Devs. They'll act on it.

[Daffid011]

I just use /bug to be honest, or try to get ahold of a dev if it is serious enough.  If that doesn't work there are some private forums we use.  I can only imgine what the mailbox of a dev looks like.  ~_~ <div></div>

[Moontayle]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR>/rant on<BR><BR>Okay, I understand, there was the deadline of the Bloodline Chronicles to consider. I'm sure that's why you tested Live Update #5 on the Test server for all of four days.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm curious as to where you get your four days number seeing as how the first vestiges of LU5 was put out <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=tup&message.id=30&jump=true" target=_blank>on the 11th.</A><BR>

[FamilyManFir]

<blockquote><hr>Moontayle wrote:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> FamilyManFirst wrote:<BR>/rant on<BR><BR>Okay, I understand, there was the deadline of the Bloodline Chronicles to consider. I'm sure that's why you tested Live Update #5 on the Test server for all of four days.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I'm curious as to where you get your four days number seeing as how the first vestiges of LU5 was put out <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=tup&message.id=30&jump=true" target=_blank>on the 11th.</A><BR> <hr></blockquote>Partly my memory failed me. The bulk of LU#5 was applied to Test on 3/16, not 3/17 as I remembered, so it was on for five days, not four. Yes, a portion of it was applied on 3/11, but not the whole thing. Personally I'm betting that the devs realized they'd have precious little time to fix things and so they pushed out what they had, to test what they could as long as they could.Also, please note that the things that are currently broken (that I know of) are changes made in the 3/16 update, not the 3/11 portion. Hmmm, maybe there's a correlation there?