EA/DICE respond to backlash
... https://www.reddit.com/r/battlefield2042/comments/rx0w9y/eadice_finally_responds_to_the_backlash/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Forum Discussion
I'm sorry, since when did it become a "brutal expectation" to deliver a functional, properly-specced-out, working game at launch?
I've worked in programming, testing, and software quality assurance for thirty-five years. Right now I'm a QA lead supervising four people working on an application. I know that games are hella complicated, far more so than most business applications, but I'd rather have resigned than sign off on the way that 2042 came out. It is not a "brutal expectation" for long-time Battlefield fans to expect a Battlefield game from something with the name "Battlefield" on it. Other than maybe parts of the Portal mode, this isn't a "love letter to the fans," it's a money grab.
I wish you guys didn't get the raw hatred you're probably getting from some quarters, I get that. That, you don't deserve. But...you DO deserve to hear, loud and clear, just how mad the loyal playerbase that has stuck with the Battlefield series for nigh on twenty years is about Battlefield 2042. You need to hear it, and your bosses at EA need to hear it. If you don't want to deal with "brutal expectations" coming off the holiday break, then either give us a proper and working Battlefield game, release the damned thing after the new year, or get out of the business.
- @AOD_moose004 I read an example of how hard it can be to QA software and the example was....
There is a bug with the '9' on a phone where it will not work.
However, it only manifests itself if the two previous presses are '0' and '1'.
As you would appreciate, you can't test every combination of button presses so missing this bug is not impossible.
Unless some one presses '019', the bug may never manifest itself and on the rare occasion that it may occur, if it isn't indeed to the previous button presses, identifying the actual issue could be very difficult if not impossible.- @Trokey66 Exactly. Even with a compact business system, you can't test every single possible combination of stuff that'll hit it or flow through it. There are automated tools that greatly help but even then most testing has to be risk-based (i.e., check the most important or highest-risk or most mission-critical features and then work backward until you run out of time). I'm not really sure how it works for AAA games...except "not well." Not nowadays anyway. Look at some of the horrendous bugs games like CP2077, Fallout 76, BF2042, COD Vanguard, etc. have been released with in the past 14 months. Glaringly obvious, borderline-gamebreaking stuff.
- @AOD_moose004 Remember where I read the example, it was used during a 'really interesting' Engineering Safe Products course, basically a risk assessor's course in a segment about software and what you say is spot on although it's not just time, its money too.
@Trokey66 wrote:
@AOD_moose004I read an example of how hard it can be to QA software and the example was....
There is a bug with the '9' on a phone where it will not work.
However, it only manifests itself if the two previous presses are '0' and '1'.
As you would appreciate, you can't test every combination of button presses so missing this bug is not impossible.
Unless some one presses '019', the bug may never manifest itself and on the rare occasion that it may occur, if it isn't indeed to the previous button presses, identifying the actual issue could be very difficult if not impossible.button press combination bugs can easily be checked via automation so that isn't the best example
*edit* in my opinion the best way to do a final QA check is to actually have a sufficiently long beta with the launch build and actually analyze results and pay attention to feedback and do it close enough to launch to use the expected launch build but early enough to actually give yourself time to fix it and if you don't have time, push back the launch *as nintendo is famous for doing* until it's done
- @Psubond With 10 digits, even automation may take too long and be cost prohibitive long before the 'magic' combination is hit.
At the end of the day though, it was a simplified example to highlight the difficulties in QAing complex software.
Even an extended Beta may not highlight some/all of the bugs so far encountered.
@AOD_moose004 wrote:I'm sorry, since when did it become a "brutal expectation" to deliver a functional, properly-specced-out, working game at launch?
I've worked in programming, testing, and software quality assurance for thirty-five years. Right now I'm a QA lead supervising four people working on an application. I know that games are hella complicated, far more so than most business applications, but I'd rather have resigned than sign off on the way that 2042 came out. It is not a "brutal expectation" for long-time Battlefield fans to expect a Battlefield game from something with the name "Battlefield" on it. Other than maybe parts of the Portal mode, this isn't a "love letter to the fans," it's a money grab.
I wish you guys didn't get the raw hatred you're probably getting from some quarters, I get that. That, you don't deserve. But...you DO deserve to hear, loud and clear, just how mad the loyal playerbase that has stuck with the Battlefield series for nigh on twenty years is about Battlefield 2042. You need to hear it, and your bosses at EA need to hear it. If you don't want to deal with "brutal expectations" coming off the holiday break, then either give us a proper and working Battlefield game, release the damned thing after the new year, or get out of the business.
Nonsense.
YOu cant blame EA for releasing buggy games if you keep buying them day one despite being able to play a free beta, do a 10 hr trial for $5, order from EA with its ~48 hr refund policy,...nevermind no one forces you to buy at launch especially in an age where there are hundreds of hours of game footage on youtube in the days after launch as well as tens of thousands of user comments and reviews.
Someone needs to hear something. It's not EA.
Featured Places
