[QUOTE=jena]
Cant say it better then that:girl:
[/QUOTE]
Okay, yes, Marco said ,two days ago, that last week it wasnât working. So the new VU would possibly be out later this week or next, but more than likely not until next. Meaning the week of September 26th.
eiy, wtf? :scared:
Guess MA had to âbeware, the ides of September!!!â
oooOOOoooOOOooo!
Reading some of this is like going on a road trip with kids:
Kid: âWhen are we going to get there?â
Adult: âWhen we get there.â
Kid: âHow log will that take?â
Adult:âAs long as it takes.â
etcâŚ
I have a little experience in this area so maybe I can shed some light on the release process.
In many companies, they have hard project dates where people are held accountable for meeting the dates that are published, and those dates donât move. Its got good and bad results. I think you can understand the good.
But the bad or, not so good part about it, is that people will push to get things into production to meet the date, and then there will sometimes be a flurry of âEmergencyâ release activity afterwards to fix things that got âwaiversâ so that they could meet the date. There is usually a lot of risk analysis is done before they do this because it can cost the company millions to be down for one day. But there is always a risk. And in general putting something into prod that is not right, it pisses off the customer and reduces thier trust in the developers ability to do quality work, even if the customers are getting functionality they want.
I would much rather they pull the code and wait till the next release, or let the date slip a little. But since their are so many dependencies date slipping is usually not an option. So your left with the choice of either putting it in and patching it later, or moving it to another major release.
Since it appears to me that MA doesnât do incremental releases as a rule (iâve only seen a few patches like the beacon ship patch), Iâm guessing they will take the time to get it right for this release, even if they slip the date some.
I personally donât have a problem with this. I HATE the empty fap bug and want the fix yesterday! But I would prefer they spend as much time as they need for quality assurance to test the shit out of it and get it right the first time. It appears thatâs what they are doing, I appreciate that, and I will wait patiently by until its ready and not bother them by asking them every five minutes âWhen are we going to get there?â because I know, weâll get there, when we get there. Hell, we have waited this longâŚ
In my company we have daily, weekly, monthly and quarterly releases. Iâm wondering how the community feels about minor incremental changes? It seems like every time I log into WoW, I have to download a patch and thatâs somewhat bothersome. But on the other hand, it feels like they are doing something to make it better all the time (or fix broken shit, Iâm not quite sure all of the time :laugh: ). How do you do you people feel about this idea of smaller fixes more often vs major releases less frequently? (Maybe this is a better question for another thread with a poll?)
In an environment that involves âREALâ money they have to be especially vigilant with the code. If someone made a dupe dicoveryâŚor some other way to profit from the game illegally, it would impact us all greatly ! Iâd rather they take their time and get it right.
That being saidâŚAre we there yet ? huh..huh 
Az
:tapfinger
[QUOTE=fresco]
:tapfinger
[/QUOTE]
Was that necessary? Maybe you didnât see the watermark of âStay on topic, No spamâ.
Anyhow. I love VUs. Especially ones that involve big updates. The crafting changes are going to be very interesting to see!! Those that can adapt well will succeed. Just like last crafting update. I saw many successfull crafters fall by the wayside because they were unwilling to change. Also, I am very interested to see what the feedback wil be on the damage/skill display! And number of probes in the HUD is a long awaited addition.
Great work MA. Now, the reaction will be exciting to say the least.
[QUOTE=Akoz]
Event system is âtop of the listâ though isnât it?
Arenas⌠rings⌠:tongue2:
[/QUOTE]
Bump.. Yes, Curious I M.
Marco, can you mail me back on this one pleaseâŚ
[QUOTE=Devil Doll]
Was that necessary? Maybe you didnât see the watermark of âStay on topic, No spamâ.
[/QUOTE]
Nah⌠WYSIWYG does not show it, so I am in a clear mate 
anyway this topic sorta outlived itself - all we can do to âstay on topicâ is wait, so that emoticon was suppose to be a BIG period, in reply to âare we there yet?â posts. Are we OK now mr. Polismen? :eek:
[QUOTE=Mac]
Reading some of this is like going on a road trip with kids:
Kid: âWhen are we going to get there?â
Adult: âWhen we get there.â
Kid: âHow log will that take?â
Adult:âAs long as it takes.â
etcâŚ
I have a little experience in this area so maybe I can shed some light on the release process.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but are we there yet?
Good post MAC.. I agree 100% with your logic..
Iâll add some further insight for those unfamiliar with the development process/cycle. There are many more overheads when use a shorter release cycle such as a monthly release cycle compared to every 3 months release cycle. There is a relatively fixed amount of time/resources required to carry out regression testing (ie. have any of the existing features been negatively affected by your new features) and environmental testing(testing with different hardware, OS etc), this is carried out during Every release cycle. Comparing a monthly release to a release every 3 month, the monthly monthly release requires 3 times the amount of regression and environmental testing then the 3 month release. The big issue with this is that this takes away resources from new feature development.
The same waste also applies to release and configuration control tasks that are carried out on each release - such as training, documentation, installation etc. A release every month will consume 3 times more resources then release every 3 months.
Overall, if MA uses some kind of quality development process, you could expect an estimated 30%(or more) development work could be carried out on a 3 month release process as compared to a monthly release process. Thats more features for you and me with the same money spent.
(Specifics - 15% of total resource time spend on regression and environmental testing, 10% spend on release, 60% on development (comprising of requirements, design, review, coding), 15% on all other testing(unit, script).)
So overall, 3 month release process(or more) is much better bang for your development buck.. The only reason for shorter release cycle is to have regular new content for your users.. Other benefits to longer release cycle - you can expect a much better quality release as folks have more time to plan the whole cycle, have time to react to all those unknowns, can work on big features.. Comments?
[QUOTE=Da Celt]
Good post MAC.. I agree 100% with your logic..
Iâll add some further insight for those unfamiliar with the development process/cycle. There are many overheads to a shorter release cycle such as monthly release cycle compared to 3 months. The relatively fixed amount of time/resources required to carry out regression testing (ie. have any of the existing features been negatively affected by your new features), environmental testing(testing with different hardware, OS etc). Comparing a monthly release to a release every 3 month, the monthly release requires 3 times the amount of time on regression and environmental testing then the 3 month release, this takes away from new feature development time.
The same waste also applies to release and configuration control tasks that are carried out on each release - such as training, documentation, installation etc. A release every month will take 3 times longer then release every 3 months. Overall, if MA uses some kind of quality development process, you could expect an estimated 30%(or more) development work could be carried out on a 3 month release process as compared to a monthly release process. (Specifics - 15% of total resource time spend on regression and environmental testing, 10% spend on release, 60% on development (comprising of requirements, design, review, coding), 15% on all other testing(unit, script).)
So overall, 3 month release process(or more) is much better bang for your development buck.. The only reason for shorter release cycle is to have regular new content for your users.. Other benefits to longer release cycle - you can expect a much better quality release as folks have more time to plan the whole cycle, have time to react to all those unknowns, can work on big features.. Comments?
[/QUOTE]
Thank you Da Celt. I also agree with what you have said here, weâre on the same page about major project planning and resource management. However, the idea I had in mind was something along the lines of what we do at my Co with incremental updates in addition to the major projects that we release into production.
We have different lvls of projects and support work going on all the time. minor bug fixes and data updates can be done daily, weekly, or on minor monthly basis, but the point is, it depends on what lvl of testing, etc. is required.
Any development that requires major integration testing is categorized as a major release project and will only be done on a quarterly basis. Everyone gets involved. I was interested to see if that was the kind of thing that could be done here with PE.
This gives the ability to have major projects planned and implemented quarterly like the crafting/mining update, but also allows you to to incremental fixes like the Empty Fap (assuming that isnât a major fix that needs major integrations testing, but you get my point).
Iâm guessing MA doesnât have the resources to have such a multilayered development process like this. But that would be a great thing to look forward to in the future if they are getting more investment resources. All of this is speculation on my part sense I donât work there and donât know what their development process is or what kind of resources they have. But I would be interested to know⌠hint hint Marco
[QUOTE=MindBuster]
⢠Added Land Area feedback when crossing borders
[/QUOTE]
I hope this means that it lists owner and taxes when you enter the land. Would be cool if it also listed mobs and maturity levels.
DD
:evilking:
[QUOTE=Devil Doll]
I hope this means that it lists owner and taxes when you enter the land. Would be cool if it also listed mobs and maturity levels.
DD
:evilking:
[/QUOTE]
I wondered the same thing.
Would be very nice to know upfront, as you cross the LG borders, rather than having to search through forums for the applicable info :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Devil Doll]
I hope this means that it lists owner and taxes when you enter the land. Would be cool if it also listed mobs and maturity levels.
DD
:evilking:
[/QUOTE]
That would be AWESOME, dont know how many times I crossed borders, was killed by uber thorifoid and stuck on that landarea for hours until I shot my way through them by spreading their asses away from my path (dying every time ofcourse :laugh:)
Good and wise suggestion 
[QUOTE=Devil Doll]
I hope this means that it lists owner and taxes when you enter the land. Would be cool if it also listed mobs and maturity levels.
[/QUOTE]
No. But a great idea. noted
secretly hopes for lvl 6-10 tools while weâre at it
[QUOTE=Sarah]
secretly hopes for lvl 6-10 tools while weâre at it
[/QUOTE]
Not in this one, but probably in the next. They are ready to be released right after the mining/carfting update.
[QUOTE=Marco|MindArk]
Not in this one, but probably in the next. They are ready to be released right after the mining/carfting update.
[/QUOTE]
now that is something alot of people want to hear!
[QUOTE=Marco|MindArk]
Not in this one, but probably in the next. They are ready to be released right after the mining/carfting update.
[/QUOTE]
But maybe we will see more âequipmentsâ (old components) then the current 91 that we have today? :rolleyes:
/Kjetil
Iâve heard factories mentioned a few times now by MA.
What is the idea behind this and what will be the purpose of these?
[QUOTE=wanda]
Iâve heard factories mentioned a few times now by MA.
What is the idea behind this and what will b the purpose of these?
[/QUOTE]
mass producing, and not this VU. high on the prioties list tho