|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Van Aewulf
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
95
   |
Posted - 2012.08.30 17:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
It would be nice if we had a little guidance on what to test specifically and maybe we could hammer out results quickly and orderly rather than all this haphazard 10 people having the same issue and making their own thread.
Additionally, it'd be nice if they had a central list of bugs they were aware of... if the bug you're reporting isn't on the list, send it in. It'd cut down on their paperwork I'm sure, and reduce the number of threads about already known issues. |
Van Aewulf
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.30 19:08:00 -
[2] - Quote
Naturi Riclenore wrote:They are not going to tell us what to test becasue they need EVEYTHING tested. This is a true beta. EVERYTHING needs to be tested.
Test how well patching occurs, if there's glitches somewhere, spawn issues, installation issues, gun issues, do fittings work properly, are skills being applied properly, etc.. test ALL of it. Outside of times where they specifically need to test someting on a large scale (like the corp battles this weekend), they are not going to tell you what to focus on.
I disagree wholeheartedly. To say everything just means they don't know what they want (not saying that is truly the case). Giving us a focus, task driven such as the corporation stress test this weekend would produce targeted results.
Saying that it's a true Beta and they need everything tested, and not giving us pointed things to test on given dates to create specific server logs and results just shows how much you know about testing.
Giving us targeted points gives targeted results... and not mucking through thousands of server logs. Another point: we've been testing instant battles all this time. What if they had everyone only play snipers for a day to test the hit detection bug and get solid results on where it's coming from? Narrow testing yields specific results. 'Everything' just produces chaos and marketing. |
Van Aewulf
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.30 19:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sees-Too-Much wrote:No, I've done testing. "Everything" is exactly what they want.
They have internal testers and QA people who have a specific set of test cases to work against. Those test cases are based on use cases supplied by the developers, so while they allow for direct, focused testing they also bias the testers toward certain actions.
With a beta they want to remove that bias. They want us to completely muck around and break whatever we can.
I don't believe that for an instant. Why run things like stress tests then? They want targeted results from us. |
Van Aewulf
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.30 19:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sees-Too-Much wrote:Stress tests are for stressing the servers to make sure they can handle the full load they'll be placed under. That's not to find bugs like what we're doing, they're to make sure the server won't crash or experience excessive lag when the game goes live.
Which are bugs in the server hardware/software for carrying such a large load. It offers data just like anything else to point toward specific issues.
Crashing IS a bug. |
Van Aewulf
Seituoda Taskforce Command
Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2012.08.30 19:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
EnIgMa99 wrote:Van Aewulf wrote:Sees-Too-Much wrote:Stress tests are for stressing the servers to make sure they can handle the full load they'll be placed under. That's not to find bugs like what we're doing, they're to make sure the server won't crash or experience excessive lag when the game goes live. Which are bugs in the server hardware/software for carrying such a large load. It offers data just like anything else to point toward specific issues. Crashing IS a bug. yeah on the client, they are stress testing and load balancing servers understanding implications of eve integration... just play the game they will do the rest. if you play it they will come.
Which is still targeted testing and only supports my point. I am playing the game, just fine, I'm only stating that if they gave us specific, optional directions for those who cared to go the extra step then maybe they could receive better results on specific issues.
It's like an extra curricular activity. A bug is a bug, and bias has nothing to do with it. It's either a 1 or a 0 especially in the case of a console where the hardware is already a control on the environment.
I will continue playing like you said. I made a suggestion, the other guy came in here rambling about what a true beta is and bias about bug results (it either exists or it doesn't, you can't bias whether something exists). |
|
|
| |
|