Latest Patch HURRICANES NOT STARTING AGAIN???

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Incorrect.. Release Candidate.. is just that a candidate. Not a release version.



The patch released was released under the title " Friday, September 28 - Patch Release Candidate and Su-26!".

You are just making an assumption to suit your own ends.

Why you feel the need to defend the presence of glaring bugs is not easy to understand. Let the bug be reported and move on.

If you understood software development you would know that development starts, then an alpha build is generated, this progresses to a beta build. In both these stages the developers know bugs will exist. But to a lesser extend in beta than alpha. Then when the developer hopes has has solved all the bugs a RC is released to receive feedback and to catch any bugs that remain. The bugs in a RC are normally hard to find and only located when the software is put out to a very number of users.

I'm sorry but not being able to start a plane in a plane simulator is NOT an bug that should be in a RC or even a beta patch. That is something that should not make it out of alpha stage.

I could care less what they call it, the point is its "STILL A BETA" that "required further testing" If they were confident there were no bugs they would have sent it directly to Steam. Now they will gauge their testing and ours, fix what can be fixed, and depending on the amount of code changes, either send out another test RC beta, or send it directly to Steam.

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by Chivas

I could care less what they call it, the point is its "STILL A BETA" that "required further testing" If they were confident there were no bugs they would have sent it directly to Steam. Now they will gauge their testing and ours, fix what can be fixed, and depending on the amount of code changes, either send out another test RC beta, or send it directly to Steam.

Actually it is the other way around. It only matters what they call it.

But this is tiresome.. clearly you have your own agenda that is not governed by the facts.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Actually it is the other way around. It only matters what they call it.

But this is tiresome.. clearly you have your own agenda that is not governed by the facts.

Its definitely a waste of my time, when you can't differentiate fact from fiction.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Chivas

If you understood the beta process you would realize that past issues can come back when the devs are constantly rewriting and adding code. Again its the whole point of releasing another beta test patch, and not the final patch

Chivas, this is not a Beta any longer. It's a "Release Candidate". Release Candidates are not supposed to have serious bugs.

Obviously it is YOU who does not understand the lifecycle of a piece of software.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Chivas, this is not a Beta any longer. It's a "Release Candidate". Release Candidates are not supposed to have serious bugs.

Obviously it is YOU who does not understand the lifecycle of a piece of software.

Unbelievable.....If it were the Release Candidate it would be sent to Steam for download. This is still a beta patch of a possible RC path, sent out to the community for testing.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Unbelievable.....If it were the Release Candidate it would be sent to Steam for download. This is still a beta patch of a possible RC path, sent out to the community for testing.

Hi Chivas, I respectfully suggest you look up the definition of "Release Candidate," because you apparently have your terminology mixed up.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Hi Chivas, I respectfully suggest you look up the definition of "Release Candidate," because you apparently have your terminology mixed up.

I apologies for any confusion I caused with my poorly chosen words "Beta/RC", but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point was the "Patch" was sent out to the community, not Steam, for further testing, and I was surprised when people got so uptight about finding bugs. They will fix the start procedure, and whatever bugs they can, and release another "Patch" for testing, or send it directly to Steam. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, the sim isn't finished yet, and will continue to evolve thru the life of the series.

[Trumper]

Originally Posted by Chivas

Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, the sim isn't finished yet, and will continue to evolve thru the life of the series.

I know BUT if we don't want to buy BOM we should at least have the sim we bought working.I
This should NOT be a option where you have to buy product B to get product A working ,that is called blackmail.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Trumper

I know BUT if we don't want to buy BOM we should at least have the sim we bought working.I
This should NOT be a option where you have to buy product B to get product A working ,that is called blackmail.

Sadly due to a lot of misinformation put out by some people there is this since of being ripped off, lied too, broken promises, or as you put it being blackmailed.

There is only one way to get past this false feeling to see the truth..

Sadly not too many people are up to the challenge..

THE CHALLENGE:

Step one of the challenge is to list all the so called broken promises..

Note for some this will be hard to do, because most of the poster only say 'broken promises' never actually listing any specific promise. For some they do this on purpose to keep the lie alive and whip up others into thinking there is a long list of broken promises, for most of the rest, they do this only because they got caught up in the lie that there is a long list of broken promises.

Step two is to provide a reference and/or link to the source of each so called promise, this step is key in that most of the so called broken promises where NOT promises at all! They were simply features that Oleg and others at 1C have talked about over the past 10+ years of some of the things they would like to do, or are trying to do at that point in the development of CoD. Another reason to find and post the link to the source of the promise is that over time what was actually said is very different from what is now being said and thus taking on a life of its own to mean something very different, seeing the original promise should clear this issue up. Than there is the whole opinion aspect of a feature in the game, take AI for one example, some consider the feature in CoD to be top notch and others consider the feature to be broken! Linking to the original promise of said feature will help those see how human expectations can not only far exceed what actually possible to do, but what was originally promised.

Only after completing these two steps will you begin to realize just how short the list is..

At which point should be able to get past this feeling of being ripped off, lied too, and or blackmailed into buying the sequel to get what you think you were promised in CoD.

In the mean time..

Take note of how many people will take issue with what I just said, and resort to attacking me personally over taking up the challenge..

Why?

Well because some here are very vested in the idea that there is a long list of broken promises, and anyone that tries to take this away from them will be attacked (kill the messenger).. The good news is all those that do only expose themselves and their true agendas

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Chivas

I apologies for any confusion I caused with my poorly chosen words "Beta/RC", but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. My point was the "Patch" was sent out to the community, not Steam, for further testing, and I was surprised when people got so uptight about finding bugs. They will fix the start procedure, and whatever bugs they can, and release another "Patch" for testing, or send it directly to Steam. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, the sim isn't finished yet, and will continue to evolve thru the life of the series.

A release candidate is code that is considered to be in "final state" and is a candidate for release, hence the name.

A release candidate says "Here is what we want to release, is this okay?" and if nobody has a problem with it, they release it.

By that logic it's likely there will not be any more fixes, given MG's track record of actually listening to the community.