F15 Patch WHEN???? CJ!!!
CJ Martin
>Hi there!
>
>How far away is the patch??? Can't be too much farther!
Hopefully, not much farther at all.
-CJ
Fourth Horseman
constant crashes since I upgraded my PC, so I've decided to wait for the
patch, but the wait is killing me.
Arrghhh...
- Fourth Horseman -
hors...@xmission.com (ICQ:12059074)
http://www.xmission.com/~horseman
----------
In article <6o062a$esl$1...@gate.ea.com>, cma...@origin.ea.com (CJ Martin)
wrote:
FooT
CrossUp VFA-18
people I guess I will break the news to you.
A beta version (1.05) of the patch was "leaked" a few weeks ago. A
small but significant number of us have this patch, ITS REAL AND WE HAVE
IT! Janes' was at v1.08 just prior to final release candidate testing
about 10 days ago. I believe if it weren't for a final multiplayer bug
we would already be seeing you in the unenviable position of spouting
your unsupported crap while the patch is being distributed. This means
one way or another,in a very short time, you won't be able to get anyone
to listen to these totally unjustified accusations, HAB have been bustin
their humps to get the patch out and to do a first rate job.
Talk all you want, you are about to be exposed beyond any possible
doubt as the worthless piece of excrement you or your name sake actually
are. Why don't you just go back to alt.phreak or what ever cesspool you
crawled out of and see if your buddies (I assume they are as stupid as
you are, since they associate with you) would like to swap lies about
how everyone is ripping you off.
CrossUp VFA-18 "Hornets"
Michael Borzcik
can't resist.
Why is it that everyone complains about Jane's releasing a sim before
it's done, before they test it and make sure it works on every system,
before they have all the bugs worked out, and then complain about them
taking their time on the patch to make sure that it works? I personally
applaud them for not giving in to the pressure to release the patch
before it's truly ready.
Keep up the good work, Jane's.
Grissom
People complain about an unfinished product, and then
complain that it takes too long to fix it. What are they
supposed to do, be happy it's only a game?
Michael Borzcik
basically complain about the patch not being released until it's really done. Anyway, it makes sense in my seriously messed-up mind. I think I'll go back to my padded
cell now. ;-)
Grissom
The wait for the patch has driven me crazy!!! :-)
sal
make sure the original game worked instead of rushing it to the shops. I for
one am sick of paying first class prices for bug-ridden software.
BTW I do like the game, and I will wait patiently for the patch. Sal
Michael Borzcik heeft geschreven in bericht
<35A65F41...@fdldotnet.com>...
Grissom
people willingly accept this. They say, " It's only a $40.00
game.", or " Writing software is really hard.".
The solution is to wait a good 3 months after each Jane's
release before purchasing. That might teach them about speed.
Hell, if enough people did that, they wouldn't have to worry
about patches at all. Or developing new games.
James Hallows
Why didn't the hoards of beta testers pick up the bugs? Were they actually beta testing or were they just playing?
Or didn't Janes act on their reports?
I find the last one hard to believe. I can understand why Janes's didn't detect all the bugs because it's damned hard to
see them as a programmer believe it or not. You actually don't get any time to use your product - you're constantly just
programming.
So that's the job of beta testers. So my question remains.
James
On Sat, 11 Jul 1998 12:59:19 +0200, "sal" <sen...@multiweb.nl> wrote:
>If they take time to make sure the patch works, why didn't they take time to
>make sure the original game worked instead of rushing it to the shops. I for
>one am sick of paying first class prices for bug-ridden software.
>BTW I do like the game, and I will wait patiently for the patch. Sal
Robert Oliver
>
> Why didn't the hoards of beta testers pick up the bugs? Were they actually beta testing or were they just playing?
> Or didn't Janes act on their reports?
Unless they use hundreds of beta testers they can't possibly test every
conceivable machine configuration that can exist in the PC world.
I sometimes think it is amazing that any of this stuff ever works.
--
Steeltown: A Big Country web site
http://www.mint.net/~roliver/bc-mint.htm
A Guide to the Star Trek Universe
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Cavern/6053/
The Unofficial Wheel of Time Chronology
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Hills/3513/wot.htm
Velcro Fly
I do agree completely with Sal here.
I too am sick of paying full price for buggy, unfinished
game software and this year I have spent conciderably less
money on software choosing to buy after the price drops and
the bug fixes are (if they are) released.
CJ Smut Martin
>Of course, this raises another question ...
>
> testing or were they just playing?
What bugs? As I recall, the beta testers were not seeing any crash bugs when
we shipped. One or two of the features they had previously tested somehow got
broken in the final build (v1.02F); but these were pretty minor things like
the missing ESL and such.
>Or didn't Janes act on their reports?
It's a matter of keeping things in perspective. We acted on everything we
considered serious, and just about everything else. When we sent v1.02F off to
duplication, we had no issues outstanding.
Actually, that's one of the reasons the patch took a while. We didn't ship the
game with a punch list behind our backs; we had to wait and see what problems
might develop. After that, we had to duplicate them in house, then fix them,
then test the fix, etc. This is how we were able to do what we said we
wouldn't do, that is, add new features in the patch. If we had some huge list
of known pre-existing bugs even before we shipped, we would have had to spend
all the "extra" time bug fixing, not adding new stuff.
The patch pretty much speaks for itself, I guess.
>I find the last one hard to believe. I can understand why Janes's didn't detect
> all the bugs because it's damned hard to
>see them as a programmer believe it or not. You actually don't get any time to
> use your product - you're constantly just
>programming.
>
>So that's the job of beta testers. So my question remains.
Hopefully, I've answered it.
-CJ
Grissom
not just Jane's that has problems. I don't mind software
with a few flaws in it as long as they are fixed in a timely
fashion. Four months is way too long to wait for a fix
for a very serious flaw which doesn't allow a campaign
to be completed. That should have been handled ASAP.
Four months... in that time span they could have gone around
the US testing the machine of everyone who bought F15!
Oh well, for these reasons I find myself buying less
software each year. Guess that's what they mean by
putting away childish things.
bp wrote:
>
>
> Lets not just pick on Janes here. This seems to be the way the
> software industry is going and its doubly bad due to the fact that its
> can be very hard to return buggy unfinished crap.
>
> With that said you have to know it is near, if not, impossible to
> write bug free code. A project as big and complex as f15 is bound to
> have bugs. IMO Janes is the best at releasing as bug free products as
> possible and still get them out the door in working and playable
> condition. They could sit on software forever if they waited to get
> all the bugs out.
> >
>
Bossman
listening ????
Velcro Fly wrote in message <35A7BD1D...@home.com>...
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
F-15 now. Even fewer show-stoppers. Now look at the complexity of F-15.
The flight model, the avionics, Lord knows how much "stuff" is going on in
F-15 at any one moment of flight time. It's unreasonable to expect
something this complex to not have a few minor bugs like F-15.
--
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
Commander, GCV Adventurer
c.s.i.p.g.f-s regular, flight sim fanatic
kev...@ticnet.com
fnv...@my.unreal.org
sal wrote in message <6o7t75$ptt$1...@news.news-service.com>...
Grissom
of just "enhancements", does it? No one expects a bug-free
sim, just a timely fix. Hell, even Microprose managed to get
the M1TP2 patch out within a month. And that sim looks kinda
complicated too. :-)
bp
<dnaisaok...@flash.net> wrote:
>Few bugs? That ungodly-long patch readme doesn't consist
>of just "enhancements", does it? No one expects a bug-free
>sim, just a timely fix. Hell, even Microprose managed to get
>the M1TP2 patch out within a month. And that sim looks kinda
>complicated too. :-)
Come on M1 isn't near as complex and that bug list is mostly little
minor things.
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
if it said something like "Fix #12: Eliminated the cause of the game
formatting hard drives on every computer running a Microsoft OS". :-)
Instead it's more like "Fix #12: Eliminated an occasional freeze that
sometimes occured when a user activated Auto-Loft bombing mode with Mk. 82s
selected & set to ripple launch 4 bombs with 10 foot intervals while pulling
a 4.1273 G turn from a heading of 203 degrees at an altitude of 12,000 feet
+/- 10 feet." :-)
--
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
Commander, GCV Adventurer
c.s.i.p.g.f-s regular, flight sim fanatic
kev...@ticnet.com
fnv...@my.unreal.org
Grissom wrote in message <35A96E64...@flash.net>...
>Few bugs? That ungodly-long patch readme doesn't consist
>of just "enhancements", does it?
<snip>
Grissom
supposedly based on definitive realism, F15 definitively has
a lot of "undesired feature deficits""? Sound better?
Wait a minute. Didn't you say that you have a
VW Bug? Well that explains it! You like bugs. Better change
your title to Beetle Bailey or Bug Boy! :-)
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
>Alright Commander, what if I say, " Boy, for a sim
>supposedly based on definitive realism, F15 definitively has
>a lot of "undesired feature deficits""? Sound better?
You really take "definitive realism" waaay too far here. F-15 is the most
realistic flight sim out there, period. Flanker is the only other in this
tier. F-15 is the "Definitive jet combat sim" and the "Definitive F-15
sim". As I just said Flanker essentially is the only one that stands with
it. You sound as though you've taken the "definitive realism" thing to its
100% fullest meaning. If you want TOTAL definitive realism, look to the
military sims. You probably will never find TOTAL defintive realism in a PC
sim. F-15 is not "supposedly" based on definitive realism. Name me one
other sim that betters F-15 in the overall realism department. What? Don't
have one? Flanker, perhaps. Other than that I doubt you'll be able to
mention many.
You cannot deny F-15's extreme realism. These minor little bugs do NOT make
F-15 an unrealistic sim. Things will always be broken in PC software. PC
flight sims will probably never reach 100% total realism. You expect too
much from a $50 Windows PC-based piece of software.
> Wait a minute. Didn't you say that you have a
>VW Bug? Well that explains it! You like bugs. Better change
>your title to Beetle Bailey or Bug Boy! :-)
>
>
I don't like bugs (except for my New Beetle). I want bug-free software as
much as the next guy, and I want absolutely realistic sims as much as the
next guy, but I also realize that as long as software is made by humans, we
won't have perfectly problem-free software and as long as we're just sitting
in front of our computer screens we won't have absolute realism.
-----
bp
<dnaisaok...@flash.net> wrote:
>Alright Commander, what if I say, " Boy, for a sim
>supposedly based on definitive realism, F15 definitively has
>a lot of "undesired feature deficits""? Sound better?
Let me ask you this.
How many of those bug did you actually notice ? (before you read the
list)
I didn't even know 75% of them existed.
> Wait a minute. Didn't you say that you have a
>VW Bug? Well that explains it! You like bugs. Better change
>your title to Beetle Bailey or Bug Boy! :-)
>
>
>Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan wrote:
>>
>> An ungodly long list of bugs that are mostly very minor. It'd be different
>> if it said something like "Fix #12: Eliminated the cause of the game
>> formatting hard drives on every computer running a Microsoft OS". :-)
>>
>> Instead it's more like "Fix #12: Eliminated an occasional freeze that
>> sometimes occured when a user activated Auto-Loft bombing mode with Mk. 82s
>> selected & set to ripple launch 4 bombs with 10 foot intervals while pulling
>> a 4.1273 G turn from a heading of 203 degrees at an altitude of 12,000 feet
>> +/- 10 feet." :-)
>>
>> --
>> Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
>> Commander, GCV Adventurer
>> c.s.i.p.g.f-s regular, flight sim fanatic
>> kev...@ticnet.com
>> fnv...@my.unreal.org
>>
Grissom
>
Let me ask you this. How many of those bug did you actually notice ?
(before you read the list)
> I didn't even know 75% of them existed.
How about not being able to finish the Iran campaign.
That's a pretty MAJOR goddamn bug. What's worse
is that they've had this fixed for months, but withheld it
while they jerk around with the JOGC! Thanks a lot guys!
Kevin "FNViper" Buchanan
>bp wrote:
>>
> Let me ask you this. How many of those bug did you actually notice ?
>(before you read the list)
>> I didn't even know 75% of them existed.
>
>
>How about not being able to finish the Iran campaign.
>That's a pretty MAJOR goddamn bug.
Who says you can't finish it? It crashes sometimes (more than Iraq) but you
CAN finish it.
> What's worse
>is that they've had this fixed for months, but withheld it
>while they jerk around with the JOGC! Thanks a lot guys!
Believe it or not, Combat.net is a popular service and lots of people like
it. Imagine the bitching if Jane's released the F-15 patch without
Combat.net support and said that'll be in another patch. "WHY DIDN'T YOU
ADD COMBAT.NET SUPPORT WITH THIS PATCH YOU JANES LOSERS?!?!?!", "YOU'RE ALL
TOO LAZY TO ADD IT NOW", etc. etc. etc.
-----
bp
<dnaisaok...@flash.net> wrote:
>bp wrote:
>>
> Let me ask you this. How many of those bug did you actually notice ?
>(before you read the list)
>> I didn't even know 75% of them existed.
>
>
>How about not being able to finish the Iran campaign.
>That's a pretty MAJOR goddamn bug. What's worse
>is that they've had this fixed for months, but withheld it
>while they jerk around with the JOGC! Thanks a lot guys!
That wasn't the question.
SCD
<kev...@ticnet.com> wrote:
>Believe it or not, Combat.net is a popular service and lots of people like
>it. Imagine the bitching if Jane's released the F-15 patch without
>Combat.net support and said that'll be in another patch. "WHY DIDN'T YOU
What about those of us that griped about the lack of CO-OP? I'm sorry,
but the primary mission of an F-15E is Air To Mud, NOT Air To Air.
I had a whole lot of fun flying F15SEIII co-op missions, as did a lot
of other people. <G> Janes F-15 is a great sim, but the co-op would
make it even better. I know I'm beating a dead horse.
SCD
Retired Crew Chief