As a software UX designer/developer I have been part of major releases and patches on server-side software systems for the better part of a decade. These systems have 500,000+ active users hourly, so ensuring that QA catches issues is a financially motivated process. Think: your income will stop if this fails. Not everything is perfect though, and occasionally something slips through.
We call these 'unintended consequences' or as developers say 'undocumented features'. :
When these are discovered too late (ie customer experiences the issue), the question is ALWAYS financial. Do we live with it until a patch can be scheduled - or - do we roll everything back to the pre-update. In the case of an MMO or our software (security related), server roll-backs are insanely expensive due to downtime.
A patch, usually with 24-hours notice is fine for non-mission-critical updates. MC or Mission Critical constitutes a lot of different scenarios, but it always boild down to affecting your income.
Each time we get a new set of unintended consequences, we rewrite our launch check-list. That's right - we use an old fashioned check-list to ensure each new element doesn't impact another. For those of you who do not understand software - it isn't one giant program, but thousand of separate elements that play together. Now see that model duplicated across many interconnected servers, you can visualize the potential for error. Yes, we do have tools to track everything, but to be honest sometimes one little glitch can have a cascade failure across the system.
For some companies that little glitch can come from something they didn't expect: routine server OS updates, hardware with defective software, or even an overzealous developer who added something at the last minute. I've experienced it all and YES if I could avoided it, I would have.
Sometimes in the rush to deploy, the development team is pressured to deliver by the date they themselves have come up with. Never let a developer select the date. Let him propose it, then double it for good measure. (I expect a lot of flack for that comment, but reality bites).
Sometimes in the rush to deploy - little things we assume will work, we don't bother to test. In this case ti might be something as simple as a flag in a dbase enabling access to STF's or fighter types. You can't manually edit the dbase and propagate the change on multiple servers, so a patch is scheduled.
It's not the end of the world. Nobody dies.
If it happens again, then look to the QA team with a steely gaze, and carry a baseball bat in the office.
cool story bro tho would be more exiting if someone died.
Yeah, lets stick on target and not detract from the subject at hand team.
what new policy? I do not remember reading anything about policy over releasing of new ships. Cryptic has the reputation of poor QA/Implementation on new release items. That isn't news. I learned never to buy new things, to let them sit minimum 2 weeks before even looking at them till bugs get worked out of them.
For a item that cost extra RL money, as consumers, they are allowed to voice their opinion. Does not mean you have to share in it, but like it or not, for the $25USD this thing cost, i thought folks being fairly civil, considering Cryptics QA track record. So like it or not, Cryptic took their money, so now they get to deal with unhappy customers over a broken product that does not function properly. Very simple actually.
See, someone who is thinking . Yes I let anything new stay out for a minimum of 2 weeks, and sometimes a month before I will look at it. It is not the fact its a great ship, beautiful design, and masterfully done.
As always it is the deployment to Holodeck and all the "bugs" that seem to always come with anything new sent out. And considering this pixel something is $25USD, I am impressed folks are staying as civil as they are. THey have the right to be upset buying a product that is not performing as advertised.
Fanboi much? They have the right to air their grievances out for a broken product they purchased. I myself can understand some issues that occur, but this is a reoccurring theme with Cryptic, and especially after DSTAHL mention to us QA is a "major thing" to him, this gives him and the whole QA/Implimentation process a major black eye.
Well at least they fixed the STF issue but I still can not equip Scorpion fighters to this ship...was this ship not intended to not be able to launch them or is this still a bug? Its a little odd that any ship but this one can launch the Scorpion fighters and this is carrier. This was also my first carrier so i was really hoping to max out the number of pets with scorpion fighters (since it only has one hanger). I am really hoping it's just a bug that is not letting me equip the fighters to it.
Scorpion Fighters are Devices, not Hangar Bay Pets. Don't put them in oyur hangar bay, put them in your device slot. You'll also notice that Scorpion Fighters only have a limited number of uses.
Or where you talking about Stalker Fighters? THey appear to be unique pets only usable by the Atrox, similar to how the Bird of Prey Pets can only be used by the Vo'Quv or the Fekiri Frigates can only be used by the Kar'Fi Battlecarrier.
If it means being honest with folks who want absurd things, I thank you.
It gets to the base, to tell someone who spent money on something not to be mad about it or air their grievance against the company who promised then X is rather silly.
Folks buy things expecting them to work. If Cryptic wanted to tell folks chill, they would. thing is, they didn't, they acknowledge the issue, apologized, somewhat, for it, and fixed it. They understand business is business, they did the oops, so they take the hit.
... what myself and many other wish is they stop taking hits and just do it right the first time.
"PWE has quadrupled our QnA staff, we have some secret behind the scenes changes to the process we can't talk about but Jack is excited, so am I, everybody is excited really. While we continuously strive to improve, we are already doing really well, but we want to do better. Trust me it is awesome."
Please hold the line
"We are aware off all the player requests for QnA, and have schedule a revamp of QnA to be implemented soon™. The Devs are really hard at work, waiting for a few new tech implementation to improve communications with the QnA team. I m sorry that some players are under the impression that QnA was awesome, in fact they didn't even have cups for coffee. Now once we install the internal Espresso update, QnA will be better then ever. We really value your feedback, and the great job you guys are all doing at reporting bugs before items go live."
Please hold the line
"Uh, so we checked and only 0.2% of bugs are actually reported by our QnA team. Hence we decided that it doesn't provide the ROI we are looking for. While we might reconsider this decision in the future, QnA in its previous form will be removed from our company. Be on the lookout on the forums, to hear about the new permanent addition to Holodeck in the form of user generated feedback. Yet, because players don't see bugs in the way we do, you have to understand that issues that seem large to you at the time, like no access to endgame content, are really not that big. When bugs get reported, we don't have the manpower to commit to QnA anymore to sift through all the reports that describe the intended function vis-a-vis actual problems. Mostly, these bugs are debatable and only reported by forum posters who are in the minority. It would be unfair to change the current state of things based on these minority opinions. Hence everybody keeps to (not) use their toys in the way they have gotten used to. "
Please hold the line