What you rather have Kabam do?

Comments

@Kabam Miike please take note of this poll and keep an eye on the results. The player base (the people who fund your salary) would like to be heard on this issue.

EVRYONE PLEASE VOTE!!

Eb0ny-O-M4w

This doesn't make any sense. You know that htere are different people working on different things right?

SHIELD

Clearly the wrong people are working on bug fixes then. Why can't everyone work on bug fixes? Clearly they are too overwhelmed to fix all the problems.

GroundedWisdom

Specific people are trained and qualified to do specific jobs. That's why. You can't pull the Hairdresser out of the Salon and put them in the Car Garage.

SHIELD

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

Jaffacaked

I would rather kabam remove the poll feature if am honest

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

DrOctavius2_2

I'm sure there are different departments at Kabam and those in charge of character design can't do the same job as those in charge of bug fixes.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

I don't get how you can't understand that adding new content inevitably adds more bugs. So stop new content for a while so old bugs can be taken care of.

So "Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved" is just flat out ignorant and wrong.

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

I don't get how you can't understand that adding new content inevitably adds more bugs. So stop new content for a while so old bug can get taken care of.

So "Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved" is just flat out ignorant and wrong.

There is irony in calling my view ignorant. You are insisting that the New Content is responsible for the issues, and you have very little understanding about programming. Adding new Champs and and new Monthly Quest is not going to have any effect on the overall mechanics of the entire game. Your conjecture is connecting two very separate areas, and in spite of us pointing out that one has nothing to do with the other, you assert that I am wrong and my view is ignorant. The New Content is not the cause of the issues. Nor will it help them if they stop adding it.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

I don't get how you can't understand that adding new content inevitably adds more bugs. So stop new content for a while so old bug can get taken care of.

So "Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved" is just flat out ignorant and wrong.

There is irony in calling my view ignorant. You are insisting that the New Content is responsible for the issues, and you have very little understanding about programming. Adding new Champs and and new Monthly Quest is not going to have any effect on the overall mechanics of the entire game. Your conjecture is connecting two very separate areas, and in spite of us pointing out that one has nothing to do with the other, you assert that I am wrong and my view is ignorant. The New Content is not the cause of the issues. Nor will it help them if they stop adding it.

How are they not connected. If you introduce more content, and thus more bugs, it takes time away from the programmers who deal with bugs, to deal with other issues.
Here's an example of why your ignorant: (ignorant just means uneducated, you don't need to take it to heart as we are all ignorant to a lot of things)

If 10 bugs are present with 10 developers to work on them that means that each developer will have 1 (this is called an average) to work on.

Now, if new content is introduced and 3 *new* bugs show up, (and in most cases of a Kabam update, old bugs that used to be fixed show back up again too) and 2 new *old* bugs show up that's now a total of 15.

This leaves 1.5 bugs or 50% more for each developer to deal with.

Now when they are struggling to get the first 10 done already and now you've added 50% work for them, (which inevitably will not get done on time either leading to a snowball effect) how are these not connected?

neb

So put the people working on cranking out the new bugs a 3 week break so the bug whack-a-mole department can catch up some.

SHIELD

neb wrote: »

So put the people working on cranking out the new bugs a 3 week break so the bug whack-a-mole department can catch up some.

Exactly!! I thought maybe I wasn't explaining things to him properly? Lol

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

I don't get how you can't understand that adding new content inevitably adds more bugs. So stop new content for a while so old bug can get taken care of.

So "Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved" is just flat out ignorant and wrong.

There is irony in calling my view ignorant. You are insisting that the New Content is responsible for the issues, and you have very little understanding about programming. Adding new Champs and and new Monthly Quest is not going to have any effect on the overall mechanics of the entire game. Your conjecture is connecting two very separate areas, and in spite of us pointing out that one has nothing to do with the other, you assert that I am wrong and my view is ignorant. The New Content is not the cause of the issues. Nor will it help them if they stop adding it.

How are they not connected. If you introduce more content, and thus more bugs, it takes time away from the programmers who deal with bugs, to deal with other issues.
Here's an example of why your ignorant: (ignorant just means uneducated, you don't need to take it to heart as we are all ignorant to a lot of things)

If 10 bugs are present with 10 developers to work on them that means that each developer will have 1 (this is called an average) to work on.

Now, if new content is introduced and 3 *new* bugs show up, (and in most cases of a Kabam update, old bugs that used to be fixed show back up again too) and 2 new *old* bugs show up that's now a total of 15.

This leaves 1.5 bugs or 50% more for each developer to deal with.

Now when they are struggling to get the first 10 done already and now you've added 50% work for them, (which inevitably will not get done on time either leading to a snowball effect) how are these not connected?

You're conjecturing that the New Content is the cause because it comes with the Patch, but the Build contains more than the New Content. One thing has nothing to do with the other. This is going nowhere, so I'll let you figure it out on your own. It's not going to resolve anything any faster to stop putting things out. Just because something comes at the same time as something else doesn't mean its automatically the cause. There are other mechanics that are at play, and adding New Content has no effect on other mechanics at work.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

Well then give the character developers a 2 week holiday and hire more programmers to fix bugs. Jesus, sounds like you guys want to keep bugs around.

That scenario isn't even logical anyway. It's more like taking a shingler and asking him to do siding. The basic skill set is still there.

They are a mutli-billion dollar company, you don't think they can figure it out?

No. What isn't logical is believing one department that has nothing to do with the other is going to resolve those issues. New Content has no bearing on existing problems. Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved.

I don't get how you can't understand that adding new content inevitably adds more bugs. So stop new content for a while so old bug can get taken care of.

So "Taking a break from adding new things is not going to help the problems get resolved" is just flat out ignorant and wrong.

There is irony in calling my view ignorant. You are insisting that the New Content is responsible for the issues, and you have very little understanding about programming. Adding new Champs and and new Monthly Quest is not going to have any effect on the overall mechanics of the entire game. Your conjecture is connecting two very separate areas, and in spite of us pointing out that one has nothing to do with the other, you assert that I am wrong and my view is ignorant. The New Content is not the cause of the issues. Nor will it help them if they stop adding it.

How are they not connected. If you introduce more content, and thus more bugs, it takes time away from the programmers who deal with bugs, to deal with other issues.
Here's an example of why your ignorant: (ignorant just means uneducated, you don't need to take it to heart as we are all ignorant to a lot of things)

If 10 bugs are present with 10 developers to work on them that means that each developer will have 1 (this is called an average) to work on.

Now, if new content is introduced and 3 *new* bugs show up, (and in most cases of a Kabam update, old bugs that used to be fixed show back up again too) and 2 new *old* bugs show up that's now a total of 15.

This leaves 1.5 bugs or 50% more for each developer to deal with.

Now when they are struggling to get the first 10 done already and now you've added 50% work for them, (which inevitably will not get done on time either leading to a snowball effect) how are thesJust because something comes at the same time as something else doesn't mean its automatically the cause. There are other mechanics that are at play, and adding New Content has no effect on other mechanics at work.

Wow, just wow man. Simple math not your strong suit? You get that adding more bugs to a game takes away time from all bugs as an average? This new update put a lot of the old bugs back into the game? So to fix these they take away resources and time fixing others? It's like talking to a wall.

SHIELD

To summary I guess:

There has never been a patch/update that hasn't introduced a new bug/glitch. Also, I'd say close to 30% of all champs have a bug at some point (either initially or after an update).

So fix all that stuff before introducing more content (which is pretty well guaranteed to have even more bugs).

GroundedWisdom

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

Agent_007

SHIELD wrote: »

@Kabam Miike please take note of this poll and keep an eye on the results. The player base (the people who fund your salary) would like to be heard on this issue.

EVRYONE PLEASE VOTE!!

Firstly, I think it's very insulting and a slap in the face to Kabam Miike to comment " the people who fund your salary". The moderators will not be forthcoming if you are going to be condescending to them.

Secondly, I don't believe a 2-3 week break would be a sufficient amount of time to fix all the bugs. There are a lot of bugs, and each bug comes with a tedious process to remove or fix them. That's why I voted no.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

1. They don't work on bugs in chronological order.
2. Based on history of updates --- new content = new bugs
3. A lot of the time the newest bugs get fixed/patched first.

Now, if new bugs are being fixed first it takes away from resources to fix old bugs.

Are you just trolling or can you seriously just not fathom that inevitably NEW CONTENT = BACK LOG OF BUGS.

I guess what I'm saying is that the bug fix team has too much to deal with already and adding new content filled with new bugs doesn't help anyone.

Your saying that the content doesn't affect the bug fix team which basically means that the unfixed bugs are just because the programmers suck?

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

1. They don't work on bugs in chronological order.
2. Based on history of updates --- new content = new bugs
3. A lot of the time the newest bugs get fixed/patched first.

Now, if new bugs are being fixed first it takes away from resources to fix old bugs.

Are you just trolling or can you seriously just not fathom that inevitably NEW CONTENT = BACK LOG OF BUGS.

I guess what I'm saying is that the bug fix team has too much to deal with already and adding new content filled with new bugs doesn't help anyone.

Your saying that the content doesn't affect the bug fix team which basically means that the unfixed bugs are just because the programmers suck?

We're done. You're not getting it, and I'm not interested in arguing the same points over and over. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

SHIELD

Agent_007 wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

@Kabam Miike please take note of this poll and keep an eye on the results. The player base (the people who fund your salary) would like to be heard on this issue.

EVRYONE PLEASE VOTE!!

Firstly, I think it's very insulting and a slap in the face to Kabam Miike to comment " the people who fund your salary". The moderators will not be forthcoming if you are going to be condescending to them.

Secondly, I don't believe a 2-3 week break would be a sufficient amount of time to fix all the bugs. There are a lot of bugs, and each bug comes with a tedious process to remove or fix them. That's why I voted no.

I'd be up for a longer break if need be. If I have an engine light on in my truck I don't say, "I'll let it go and see what else goes wrong". I get the problem fixed regardless of how long it's gonna be in the shop. That's the responsible thing to do.

As far as the condescending remark, you're probably right but I honestly think they lose sight of things sometimes.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

1. They don't work on bugs in chronological order.
2. Based on history of updates --- new content = new bugs
3. A lot of the time the newest bugs get fixed/patched first.

Now, if new bugs are being fixed first it takes away from resources to fix old bugs.

Are you just trolling or can you seriously just not fathom that inevitably NEW CONTENT = BACK LOG OF BUGS.

I guess what I'm saying is that the bug fix team has too much to deal with already and adding new content filled with new bugs doesn't help anyone.

Your saying that the content doesn't affect the bug fix team which basically means that the unfixed bugs are just because the programmers suck?

We're done. You're not getting it, and I'm not interested in arguing the same points over and over. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I'm very curious if I'm just missing something or what? We both have polar opposite views on this and both seem to think we are correct. I'd love for someone else to point out why one of us is not seeing the correct picture.

Adding new content with new bugs takes away time and resources from getting old bugs fixed? Yes or No?

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

1. They don't work on bugs in chronological order.
2. Based on history of updates --- new content = new bugs
3. A lot of the time the newest bugs get fixed/patched first.

Now, if new bugs are being fixed first it takes away from resources to fix old bugs.

Are you just trolling or can you seriously just not fathom that inevitably NEW CONTENT = BACK LOG OF BUGS.

I guess what I'm saying is that the bug fix team has too much to deal with already and adding new content filled with new bugs doesn't help anyone.

Your saying that the content doesn't affect the bug fix team which basically means that the unfixed bugs are just because the programmers suck?

We're done. You're not getting it, and I'm not interested in arguing the same points over and over. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I'm very curious if I'm just missing something or what? We both have polar opposite views on this and both seem to think we are correct. I'd love for someone else to point out why one of us is not seeing the correct picture.

Adding new content with new bugs takes away time and resources from getting old bugs fixed? Yes or No?

No. The ones responsible for creating New Content are not the same people as the ones responsible for Bugs and Known Issues.

SHIELD

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

SHIELD wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Conjecture. What you're saying is, stop a department that has nothing to do with bugs, so they can continue to work on them as they do. Thereby having no New Content, existing bugs, and people who become impatient with nothing new and continued efforts to fix the problems. The New Content is not responsible for the issues. There's really no other way to explain it.

1. They don't work on bugs in chronological order.
2. Based on history of updates --- new content = new bugs
3. A lot of the time the newest bugs get fixed/patched first.

Now, if new bugs are being fixed first it takes away from resources to fix old bugs.

Are you just trolling or can you seriously just not fathom that inevitably NEW CONTENT = BACK LOG OF BUGS.

I guess what I'm saying is that the bug fix team has too much to deal with already and adding new content filled with new bugs doesn't help anyone.

Your saying that the content doesn't affect the bug fix team which basically means that the unfixed bugs are just because the programmers suck?

We're done. You're not getting it, and I'm not interested in arguing the same points over and over. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

I'm very curious if I'm just missing something or what? We both have polar opposite views on this and both seem to think we are correct. I'd love for someone else to point out why one of us is not seeing the correct picture.

Adding new content with new bugs takes away time and resources from getting old bugs fixed? Yes or No?

No. The ones responsible for creating New Content are not the same people as the ones responsible for Bugs and Known Issues.

But what I'm saying is when the new content gets created there are new bugs, and those go to the bug fix team to fix the new bugs? Or am I wrong in that?

If i am right in assuming that, then by adding new content full of new bugs adds to the workload of the bug fix team and slows them down on fixing old bugs as they seem to prioritize new bugs that were just released.

SHIELD

I'll just assume you didn't flag all my posts? @GroundedWisdom lol.

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

I'll just assume you didn't flag all my posts? @GroundedWisdom lol.

No I didn't. I have no issues telling people why I did when I do.

SHIELD

There should be a record of who flags stuff. Make it a bit more honest... Maybe my next poll? Lol

GroundedWisdom

SHIELD wrote: »

There should be a record of who flags stuff. Make it a bit more honest... Maybe my next poll? Lol

They used to have it visible and it led to more arguments so they removed it. The Mods can see who is abusing it, though.

SHIELD

@GroundedWisdom
I get that new content developers and the bug fix team are different, and I'll agree with you on that. But if the new content creates additional bugs, doesn't that add to the work for the bug fix team. I'm still trying to figure out how new bugs aren't the responsibility of the bug fix team?

Sirnoob

SHIELD wrote: »

There should be a record of who flags stuff. Make it a bit more honest... Maybe my next poll? Lol

Use to be like that but someone started necroposting threads to argue with someone that flagged him after that they got rid of it