Question on beta testers

[pocatellodave]

I was wondering if SHIV had any ...tongue in cheek...beta testers. It's just that I recall some of the sim companies using volunteers to check out their products for bugs.I never was a beta tester,as I recall it seems you needed to have a lot of credentials to get to be one.It would appear that Ubisoft didn't have beta testers,as I'm sure a lot of the bugs would have been caught.I'm sitting here thinking with the latest from Ubisoft being there may not be a 1.3 patch,and the mention of a class act law suit.Having a few free beta testers might have been a pretty good idea.I like playing SHIV,and the bugs don't bother me that much,as I'm just a dweeb,and play on 65% realism settings,but that is fun for me.This whole issue kind of reminds me of Eurofighter,and the microprose thingy.Talk about screaming for a patch. Ahhhh the glory years of simming.
Pocatellodave

[AVGWarhawk]

Simply put, yes. Look at the time line. Game went gold(off to producers for copies to sell). Game played by beta testers in the mean time. With in less than 2 days after the game was in our grubby hands the first patch was out. The developers were making the first patch while the game was being copied to DVD for sale. This rather large patch was not made in two days. It was developed by the first testers. At least that is how it looks to me.

[mr chris]

What a sorry state of affairs the devs knew how bad the game was and still let it get sent out to the stores

Also why we are on the subject false advertisting which is what the devs and Ubi a guilty of. SS.com is also far from whiter than white. On the back of my copy of the game it says, "SILENT HUNTER 4 IS A KNOCKOUT" Subsim.com
Well i would like to find the guy who said that of a game when we are all honest is worse and has more bugs out of the box than SH3 had. The Devs had years to fix the bugs that they knew from SH3 and really go to town on the game but instaed they have just made a pacfic add on to SH3 and called it SH4 very poor show from everyone invouled.

[AVGWarhawk]

What a sorry state of affairs the devs knew how bad the game was and still let it get sent out to the stores

Devs did not make the cut off date. Apparently preset under contract to have it on the shelves for sale on the date promised. This is how it looks. Game went out unfinished, patch in the works while they produced it. Patch out day two after sale.

Also why we are on the subject false advertisting which is what the devs and Ubi a guilty of. SS.com is also far from whiter than white. On the back of my copy of the game it says, "SILENT HUNTER 4 IS A KNOCKOUT" Subsim.com
Well i would like to find the guy who said that of a game when we are all honest is worse and has more bugs out of the box than SH3 had. The Devs had years to fix the bugs that they knew from SH3 and really go to town on the game but instaed they have just made a pacfic add on to SH3 and called it SH4 very poor show from everyone invouled.

IMHO the game is a knockout. I can think of many great things about it than bad things about it. I need basically one fix...the radar. Nothing else bothers me with it. I have three mods at the moment. Two texture mods for the interface and the reduced radio traffic mod for the clipboard. So my game is basically vanilla. If the vanilla is this good in my eyes, it will only get better when the modders dig in. They already have

[mr chris]

IMHO it is a very lazy effort. They could have done so so much but they just did the bear minium to the game. Knowing that the coummuinty would take care of the rest with the great modders it holds. If the Modders here can do such a good job in such a short space of time. Why have they done so little in so much time??
Everyone around here is so fast to get in Ubi back and they do deserve the crap they get but the devs are very far from blameless.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by mr chris

IMHO it is a very lazy effort. They could have done so so much but they just did the bear minium to the game. Knowing that the coummuinty would take care of the rest with the great modders it holds. If the Modders here can do such a good job in such a short space of time. Why have they done so little in so much time??
Everyone around here is so fast to get in Ubi back and they do deserve the crap they get but the devs are very far from blameless.

I agree. To think a game of this magnitude could be done in the time alloted by any stretch of the imagination was just bad foresight. Perhaps they thought it would take less time as they based it on the SH3 engine and half the work was done. Looked good at the time I'm sure. As it pans out, it was a bad decision. The modders can only do so much when the bug issues are hard coded. This we have to leave up to the developers. Hopefully they choose to work on it.

I'm the type of person that if I make a mistake in my business world, I do everything to correct it to the customer satisfaction and even if it costs me financially. I hope this sentiment is the same with UBI.

[TDK1044]

Yes this game was Beta tested as much as it could be given the imposed production timeline. The blame here is 100 percent with Ubisoft management and not with the Devs, who in my experience are totally dedicated to making SH4 an excellent sub sim.

This project was an 18 month project squeezed into about 12 months in order to save money. The Devs went into this knowing that the production development timeline was totally unrealistic, and hoping that they'd be allowed to heavily patch the game after release.

For Ubisoft not to authorize patch 1.3 would be totally inappropriate in my opinion.

[bigboywooly]

Well as the devs borrowed HEAVILY from SH3 it should have taken less time to build anyway

Cant see why everybody blames Ubi
Sure they may have given the devs a short timetable
Or did they ?

Whatever way it happened the devs knew the timeline and didnt finish the game
Simple
Same with SH3

Even if you get a 3rd patch whats to say that will finish it ?
Didnt SH3

[AVGWarhawk]

Well as the devs borrowed HEAVILY from SH3 it should have taken less time to build anyway

In theory yes, less time. But as one knows, one new simple idea tends to grow into many more ideas and builds from there. Thus adding more time to make these new ideas work. Looks like more ideas than time allotted.

Cant see why everybody blames Ubi
Sure they may have given the devs a short timetable
Or did they ?

Probably something that we will never know.

Whatever way it happened the devs knew the timeline and didnt finish the game
Simple
Same with SH3

Even if you get a 3rd patch whats to say that will finish it ?
Didnt SH3

I do not suspect the third patch will finish it. I suspect if it does come about, it will fix the MAJOR bugs. Not much more. These are my thoughts on it.

IMHO SH3 was completed with the major mods created. SH4 looks to be much the same.

[TDK1044]

Originally Posted by bigboywooly

Well as the devs borrowed HEAVILY from SH3 it should have taken less time to build anyway

Cant see why everybody blames Ubi
Sure they may have given the devs a short timetable
Or did they ?

Whatever way it happened the devs knew the timeline and didnt finish the game
Simple
Same with SH3

Even if you get a 3rd patch whats to say that will finish it ?
Didnt SH3

You obviously know very little about building a game of this nature using an existing game engine as a foundation. As for your statement 'the devs knew the timeline and didn't finish the game. Simple.' Don't you get it? The Devs work for Ubisoft. They work on whatever projects Ubisoft puts them on, just like you do whatever your bosses tell you to do.

This Forum loves to use car analogies, so here's one. You work for Ford, and they put you on a project for a totally revamped version of the Ford Explorer. Everyone knows that to do this and have no problems once the vehicle is released will take 18 months, but Ford tell you they won't pay for 18 months development, they'll pay for 12 months. Get on with it.

You can either resign in protest, or get on with it and do your very best knowing that there will be a lot of recalls on the vehicle.

If you're a game developer living in Romania, how many other jobs of that nature do you think there are for you to go to?

As I said in my previous post, this problem is 100 percent a Ubisoft management problem, and if they don't issue patch 1.3 then they should be ashamed.

[bigboywooly]

lol this forum really does crack me up at times

Say it like it is

Its unfinished and never will be
All this bollox about voting for a 1.3 patch
IMHO there is already a 1.3 patch and the minute its released Ubi and the devs go to god status again

And if there isnt a 3rd patch then Ubi deserve all they get in terms of lost sales

I only buy around 3 or 4 comp game s ayear but I have never bought a series with so many flaws on release

Even the patches dont fix things and keep needing more until all support is ceased

SH3 deserved more patches
Didnt get them
Yes the mod community stepped up and made the game a lot more playable but even now the SDK is needed to fix things and add things such as wolfpacks to SH3 - which really should have been in from the start

Are Ubi to blame for putting a Lancaster in the US roster ?
No thats the devs half assed job

Much the same as giving every nation an armed trawler in SH3 that in reality was an Isles class minesweeper
Not to mention the tug is a US fleet one

Sorry but the devs arent blameless

[tater]

Look in the mirror. YOU are the beta tester.

[ref]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

This Forum loves to use car analogies, so here's one. You work for Ford, and they put you on a project for a totally revamped version of the Ford Explorer. Everyone knows that to do this and have no problems once the vehicle is released will take 18 months, but Ford tell you they won't pay for 18 months development, they'll pay for 12 months. Get on with it.

You can either resign in protest, or get on with it and do your very best knowing that there will be a lot of recalls on the vehicle.

I'm really getting tired of the "don't blame the programmer, he's just an employee" attitude, things aren't painted in black and white, there's no company that should fire personnel for telling the truth, if my boss tell's me that I have to make a one month job in 10 days, it's my responsability to show him it can't be done, If he insists in making it in that time then again it's my responsability to reconfigure the project so I be able to make it in such time, focusing on the highest priority things.
Using your example, If I have to make a new car, I first be sure that it has all four wheels before designing a new ashtray...

I work producing TV ads, and I have to meet tight deadlines every day, but if I can't produce a spot in time I don't send it to the networks without finishing it.
I also worked as a programmer some years ago, so I know the difficulties it has.

Ref

[TDK1044]

And so it goes on...and on.

[AVGWarhawk]

Even the patches dont fix things and keep needing more until all support is ceased

So where is the line drawn to stop the patching? It is a vicious cycle! Really, just fix the major bugs that is all we are asking. IMHO I see few major bugs but you know, this thread is getting us nowhere. We are basically asking for a fix for these major bugs. This thread could go on for days to no avail. Our energies should be going after UBI for the fix. Currently I have voted on the poll, signed Neals petition and written to UBI. If I come up with anything else I can do to foster a patch I will do so.

Oh I forgot, the devs will not be Gods again with the patch. They will be vindicated!