Fix the bug that actually matters?

[VelKallor]

This is about how fast bugs are fixed. If you havent worked that out by now, I cant help you.

"I want it fixed NAO". Doesnt work that way, never has, never will. Again, you dont fix bugs on the fly with a halfbaked "workaround" that may cause more issues later.

Get real.

[Stormpeaks]

"I want it fixed NAO". Doesnt work that way, never has, never will. Again, you dont fix bugs on the fly with a halfbaked "workaround" that may cause more issues later.

Get real.

Or you do QA testing and then those bugs dont happen

No way

And before you tell me "BUGS ARE MEANT TO HAPPEN !!!", yes, small bugs are meant to happen, not game breaking bugs in the highest tier of content in the game.

Just like the whole housing fiasco with the winner being number 0, those things are not small bugs, and if there was testing it would have been noticed.

Btw as a little reminder, it took over a month IIRC for the housing fix to come out, how is that acceptable ?

[Kes13a]

Or you do QA testing and then those bugs dont happen

No way

And before you tell me "BUGS ARE MEANT TO HAPPEN !!!", yes, small bugs are meant to happen, not game breaking bugs in the highest tier of content in the game.

Just like the whole housing fiasco with the winner being number 0, those things are not small bugs, and if there was testing it would have been noticed.

even Q&A cannot catch all bugs. thats unrealistic since Q&A is not testing on a live server.

from what appears to happen, its when the servers are under load according to the release, which since they did not say what kind of load, its likely the devs had to go over logs to try and determine how it happens and may not have been able to be replicated in their test environment. Since it has been cleared, clearly it was not happening 100% of the time, which are some of the hardest bugs to root out. the devs where I work see this with our software, and its called "unintended application". It cannot really be "tested" because its not a workflow the devs OR Q&A had thought of or would use. could they have caught it? sure, maybe, the number 0 one, most likely, this one I am not so sure because the test server, no matter how close you make it to live, will never be a live server.

[Stormpeaks]

even Q&A cannot catch all bugs. thats unrealistic since Q&A is not testing on a live server.

from what appears to happen, its when the servers are under load according to the release, which since they did not say what kind of load, its likely the devs had to go over logs to try and determine how it happens and may not have been able to be replicated in their test environment. Since it has been cleared, clearly it was not happening 100% of the time, which are some of the hardest bugs to root out. the devs where I work see this with our software, and its called "unintended application". It cannot really be "tested" because its not a workflow the devs OR Q&A had thought of or would use. could they have caught it? sure, maybe, the number 0 one, most likely, this one I am not so sure because the test server, no matter how close you make it to live, will never be a live server.

Yeah sure, literally number 0 winning couldnt have been caught beforehand, alright lmao

There is a thing called QA testing, maybe they should try that and actually play the content they put out to make sure it works properly, small bugs are fine, those bugs are not small.

Not trying to completely excuse bugs that occur anyway but you must be living in lala-land if you seriously believe that in the history of video games there never was a game breaking bug or two in every single product ever.

It clearly shows your blatant ignorance over the issues if you believe just waving things with a magic wand and everyone in the team being able to catch every issue in the game.

Besides you dont even seriously care about the game anyway. Go back to your little gingerbread house or whatever and stop pretending like you actually give a damn about the game.

Considering your past posts in response to me, I think I will put you back where you were before which is the ignore list since obviously you cant behave and talk like a normal human being

adios

[Kes13a]

Yeah sure, literally number 0 winning couldnt have been caught beforehand, alright lmao

There is a thing called QA testing, maybe they should try that and actually play the content they put out to make sure it works properly, small bugs are fine, those bugs are not small.

thinking you missed where I said this... could they have caught it? sure, maybe, the number 0 one, most likely

I am fairly confident that their QA team for the most part, earns their money, unlike the STF or moderation teams. but even the best intended Q&A in any software will never release a perfect product. thats about as likely as devs ever getting "balance" balanced. it is simply impossible to test for every conceivable user case, hardware or scenario. there are deadlines.. and we the players are the ones doing the pushing to meet those deadlines (read any of the threads about the extension of the development cycle)

[TaleraRistain]

even Q&A cannot catch all bugs. thats unrealistic since Q&A is not testing on a live server.

from what appears to happen, its when the servers are under load according to the release, which since they did not say what kind of load, its likely the devs had to go over logs to try and determine how it happens and may not have been able to be replicated in their test environment. Since it has been cleared, clearly it was not happening 100% of the time, which are some of the hardest bugs to root out. the devs where I work see this with our software, and its called "unintended application". It cannot really be "tested" because its not a workflow the devs OR Q&A had thought of or would use. could they have caught it? sure, maybe, the number 0 one, most likely, this one I am not so sure because the test server, no matter how close you make it to live, will never be a live server.

The 0 bug from what I understood was an issue with systems communicating with each other and it's entirely possible they had test versions of those servers where it didn't manifest that bug, most likely because they weren't using the same API calls and endpoints the live servers were. As you said, no matter how close you make it to live, it will never be a live server.

Like you said, software QA is never going to catch everything. I would also be curious how the scale and scope of their systems have changed. My company has been having more bugs because we're migrating to new systems, adding more systems than we have now, and integrating AWS into our processes. When the scale increases, the likelihood of bugs does, too, and they can be more widespread or affect more things. I would think there had to have been some changes going on behind the scenes since they're working on a significant graphical upgrade.

The Caloric bug is one that prevents people from clearing. This is not a good thing. It would have been good if Square prioritized this one, but it appears that they didn't.

I wouldn't say it's necessarily they didn't prioritize it. It's probably more complicated. Something people on the outside may not realize is that the release of bug fixes isn't entirely based on how severe they are. They probably have a couple team members working on some other bugs while other devs puzzle this one out and those were faster to get ready to go than this more complex issue.

[Daeriion_Aeradiir]

I wouldn't say it's necessarily they didn't prioritize it. It's probably more complicated. Something people on the outside may not realize is that the release of bug fixes isn't entirely based on how severe they are. They probably have a couple team members working on some other bugs while other devs puzzle this one out and those were faster to get ready to go than this more complex issue.

This. The P10 bug had been known about for a little under two weeks, it's easy for them to have R&D'd the solution to it for the hotfix. Comparatively, the Caloric bug has been known about for roughly a week, in which part of the time it was only affecting the most hardcore groups that were even on P12s at all giving a small sample size, on top of the fact certain strategies for Caloric Theory 1 put the fire groups very close together, giving false positives for people that think the fire groups just clipped or something. On top of that, the solution might not be as obvious as the P10 one is (Which to be fair, the P10 one isn't necessarily a solution in itself, it's just disabling the offending actions until a more concrete solution is found). Especially for a bug that's primary factor is that it's contingent on server stress load, coupled with RNG on top of it - not exactly the most easy test conditions for consistency in replication, and also a set of conditions that can quite easily dodge internal QA.

They've already acknowledged it and are working on a solution - complaining won't speed them up, it's just a waste of your energy you can better spend doing something productive in your life.

[BRVV]

"I want it fixed NAO"

No one said that. It's about priority of fixing bugs and testing.