69153 réponses à ce sujet

[TrueMadayar]

gamer_girl wrote...

Bugs that seem simple to fix can be really really hard to spot. So I'm not surprised nor mad at them at all for it.

Oh, I was really pissed when I found out that I missed out, I was surprised there was no dialogue, and it was a horrid glitch since I really had no intention to play SP ever again (and to the day, I only played the escape from earth a second time), so it would never be corrected.

Now I stopped caring, I know the workaround, I implemented it. If I ever play ME3 again, they will talk to me.

[Dilandau3000]

exelsis wrote...

It can't break something else unless there is another glitch present in the game that somehow interacts with either the old or new params.

That's probably what they said about the Ashley-related fix that caused this bug in the first place. As someone who has had several software engineering jobs and holds a degree in computer science, I know first hand that any change can have unintended side-effects. Like you said, there could be another glitch that could have another unintended interaction with the fix.

Right now they have a relatively minor problem that 90% of the people who play the game (and don't read the forum) probably won't even notice. If they try to fix it without doing the the proper QA process (a potentially long and costly process), then there's a non-negligable chance they'll make it worse.

This is why all software ships with known bugs. At some point you have to say "we need to ship and the risk of fixing this outweighs the benefit". Because it's better to have relatively minor bugs you know then to introduce potentially worse bugs you don't know by trying to fix them.

Modifié par Dilandau3000, 05 mai 2012 - 04:54 .

[gamer_girl]

Having spent the past year doing quite a bit of programming, I've quickly learned that it is a huge pain in the neck, and not at all easy to spot bugs, let alone fix them without introducing new ones.
That and the constant negativity and insolence on BSN is irritating to me and I like to try to stop it or at least make it so BSN has a somewhat less prevalent group of whiners, blamers, and emos.

[TrueMadayar]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

That's probably what they said about the Ashley-related fix that caused this bug in the first place. As someone who has several software engineering jobs and holds a degree in computer science, I know first hand that any change can have unintended side-effects. Like you said, there could be another glitch that could have another unintended interaction with the fix.

Right now they have a relatively minor problem that 90% of the people who play the game (and don't read the forum) probably won't even notice. If they try to fix it without doing the the proper QA process (a potentially long and costly process), then there's a non-negligable chance they'll make it worse.

This is why all software ships with known bugs. At some point you have to say "we need to ship and the risk of fixing this outweighs the benefit". Because it's better to have relatively minor bugs you know then to introduce potentially worse bugs you don't know by trying to fix them.

What I found really funny was that they never even NOTICED the door label bug until somebody pointed it out to them in the ken & gabby thread...

[TrueMadayar]

gamer_girl wrote...

Having spent the past year doing quite a bit of programming, I've quickly learned that it is a huge pain in the neck, and not at all easy to spot bugs, let alone fix them without introducing new ones.
That and the constant negativity and insolence on BSN is irritating to me and I like to try to stop it or at least make it so BSN has a somewhat less prevalent group of whiners, blamers, and emos.

They should focus all energy to get EA to allow them to completely work over the endings, and just tell us how we edit the savegames to change the other bugs.

[Dilandau3000]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

-N7-Seeker wrote...

I am a fan of rock myself, but i prefer her singing. I prefer every quarian singing.

This inspired me, so I made this:


(Click for full size)

Any ideas for band names?

To try to get the topic away from ****ing about BioWare: I was initially going to have Legion play the triangle, but unfortunately I couldn't find a suitable prop.

And I don't know why Wrex is playing the bass as if it's a guitar. Some basists do like to use a plectrum, so maybe Wrex is one of them? Or potentially I made a mistake and I'm trying to weasel my way out of it?

[exelsis]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

exelsis wrote...

It can't break something else unless there is another glitch present in the game that somehow interacts with either the old or new params.

That's probably what they said about the Ashley-related fix that caused this bug in the first place. As someone who has several software engineering jobs and holds a degree in computer science, I know first hand that any change can have unintended side-effects. Like you said, there could be another glitch that could have another unintended interaction with the fix.

Right now they have a relatively minor problem that 90% of the people who play the game (and don't read the forum) probably won't even notice. If they try to fix it without doing the the proper QA process (a potentially long and costly process), then there's a non-negligable chance they'll make it worse.

This is why all software ships with known bugs. At some point you have to say "we need to ship and the risk of fixing this outweighs the benefit". Because it's better to have relatively minor bugs you know then to introduce potentially worse bugs you don't know by trying to fix them.

But it is telling that bioware has not made an effort to correct this issue. When fallout 3 released with a timed main quest, people that bought it were dissapointed. VERY soon after, a patch made the quest non time-dependant. This fix effected every single critical plot mission, and they still pushed that thing out like a well-oiled game developing machine.

Skyrim was released with a thousand irritating and humorous bugs. They fixed half of them almost immediately, and that game is gigantic. And then they fixed more bugs. And more bugs. They fixed bugs that no one ever discovered, don't impact the game, or are almost undetectable.

And mass effect 3 has been out for 2 months, and a glitch that prevents a significant amount of dialogue has recieved no effort in repairing it. I am dissapoint.

EDIT: can someone tell me why URDNOT WREX is NOT playing the double guitar?

Modifié par exelsis, 05 mai 2012 - 05:00 .

[Unschuld]

exelsis wrote...
It can't break something else unless there is another glitch present in the game that somehow interacts with either the old or new params. The thing I'd be worried about if I was bioware is saves becoming corrupted, or the fix simply not working on any save after ash gets hospitalized.

"Confidence born of ignorance."

The problem isn't "awakening" other existing  bugs, it's creating several more bugs by solving one. They practically have to play the entire game every single time they change/fix something, to make sure it didn't break anything else. This can be something else entirely, like how the bug they fixed for Ash somehow created a bug that killed the dialogue in engineering.


Even then, once something is fixed, they have to go through all of the approval processes and certifications through Microsoft to even apply the patch. This takes time, and the benefit usually has to justify the cost of the effort spent for the fix.

*And again, I'm a day late and a dollar short when compared to Dilandau...

exelsis wrote...

Skyrim was released with a thousand irritating and humorous bugs. They fixed half of them almost immediately, and that game is gigantic. And then they fixed more bugs. And more bugs. They fixed bugs that no one ever discovered, don't impact the game, or are almost undetectable. 

And mass effect 3 has been out for 2 months, and a glitch that prevents a significant amount of dialogue has recieved no effort in repairing it. I am dissapoint. 

This is still like comparing apples to oranges.

Modifié par Unschuld, 05 mai 2012 - 05:03 .

[Terrorize69]

-N7-Seeker wrote...

Terrorize69 wrote...

Yeah gabby, he dreamed about the three of them together all night long, he tells you at one point lol

When lol? *Searches youtube*

ME2 or 3, not sure which. Only seen it on Femshep, also trys to hit on femshep, wish he was a LI option lol

[TrueMadayar]

Unschuld wrote...


"Confidence born of ignorance."

The problem isn't "awakening" other existing  bugs, it's creating several more bugs by solving one. They practically have to play the entire game every single time they change/fix something, to make sure it didn't break anything else. This can be something else entirely, like how the bug they fixed for Ash somehow created a bug that killed the dialogue in engineering.


Even then, once something is fixed, they have to go through all of the approval processes and certifications through Microsoft to even apply the patch. This takes time, and the benefit usually has to justify the cost of the effort spent for the fix.

Time was a big issue for them, anyway. They left complete dialogues half-finished and deactivated in the code. Including another try to murder Tali:

"Yeah, early in the planning stages we were going to have a sub plot
where a sabeteur was on board the Normandy, and Shepard would have to
choose which engineer would could into the engine core and save the day,
most likely dieing in the process.  That plot never saw the light of
day, since I didn't have time to write it or script it and cinematic
design wouldn't have had time to do the scenes, but we did have the
dialog hooks in place for a dead Adams/Donnelly/Daniels/Tali in other
banter.  Those lines will just never fire."

[Dilandau3000]

exelsis wrote...

EDIT: can someone tell me why URDNOT WREX is NOT playing the double guitar?

I felt bassist suited him better. Plus, the double-necked guitar prop from guitar hero (that's where I got all the instruments) doesn't look anywhere near as cool as that one.

[gamer_girl]

Ok seriously exelsis that glitch in Fallout 3 was probably easy to fix, and had little to no glitches that come up from fixing it.
And they've obviously made an effort if they found the glitch and decided that it's too difficult to fix it without making more problems "right now". That doesn't mean it won't get fixed later.
And if you think they're so bloody incompetent, how about you go in there, get a job as a programmer, and fix it yourself since you're so godly. >_>
Otherwise shut it cause I'm sick of hearing nothing but complaints from you.

[exelsis]

Unschuld wrote...

exelsis wrote...
It can't break something else unless there is another glitch present in the game that somehow interacts with either the old or new params. The thing I'd be worried about if I was bioware is saves becoming corrupted, or the fix simply not working on any save after ash gets hospitalized.

"Confidence born of ignorance."

The problem isn't "awakening" other existing  bugs, it's creating several more bugs by solving one. They practically have to play the entire game every single time they change/fix something, to make sure it didn't break anything else. This can be something else entirely, like how the bug they fixed for Ash somehow created a bug that killed the dialogue in engineering.

Even then, once something is fixed, they have to go through all of the approval processes and certifications through Microsoft to even apply the patch. This takes time, and the benefit usually has to justify the cost of the effort spent for the fix.

I know that programming is not an easy thing, and that bugfixing can be an infuriating process. I've done some of both. But when bioware knows exactly what the problem is, and if it is just two incorrect parameters that need to be replaced with the correct ones, no new glitches can be created if those two simple parameters are correctly replaced. If no one screws up and puts in an extra comma or parenthases, you will only uncover existing, if previously invisible, glitches in the code.

We are tali. Bioware is the little turian. EA is garrus. OPEN THE AIRLOCKS TO KILL THEM BOTH.

Modifié par exelsis, 05 mai 2012 - 05:05 .

[Unschuld]

exelsis wrote...
I know that programming is not an easy thing, and that bugfixing can be an infuriating process. I've done some of both. But when bioware knows exactly what the problem is, and if it is just two incorrect parameters that need to be replaced with the correct ones, no new glitches can be created if those two simple parameters are correctly replaced. If no one screws up and puts in an extra comma or parenthases, you will only uncover existing, if previously invisible, glitches in the code.

Fixes can only be implemented if approval is given to allocate resources. They have much more pressing issues currently.

[Unschuld]

exelsis wrote...

That was random and wtf enough to make me laugh. Lolwut?!

[Dilandau3000]

I'm much more pissed with YouTube at the moment, since after three days I (and many others) am still unable to upload videos longer than 15 minutes, so I can't continue my ME2 Let's Play. They are apparently working on it, but communication is not Google's strong point, so who knows when it's going to be fixed.

[exelsis]

Unschuld wrote...

exelsis wrote...
I know that programming is not an easy thing, and that bugfixing can be an infuriating process. I've done some of both. But when bioware knows exactly what the problem is, and if it is just two incorrect parameters that need to be replaced with the correct ones, no new glitches can be created if those two simple parameters are correctly replaced. If no one screws up and puts in an extra comma or parenthases, you will only uncover existing, if previously invisible, glitches in the code.

Fixes can only be implemented if approval is given to allocate resources. They have much more pressing issues currently.

Yeah, I'd have to admit that significant portions of their fanbase abandoning them forever to be a serious problem for bioware.

[TrueMadayar]

@gamer @Unschuld You will learn whom to ignore here, sooner or later...there is a certain pointlessness. I met brick walls that would more likely agree to reason.

Anyway, since I posted Dusty Everman's plot snip earlier: Would you have liked a saboteur-on-the-Normandy subscript, where one in Engineering basically has to die?

[Dilandau3000]

TrueMadayar wrote...

Anyway, since I posted Dusty Everman's plot snip earlier: Would you have liked a saboteur-on-the-Normandy subscript, where one in Engineering basically has to die?

ME already reminds me a lot of Wing Commander, and saboteur/traitor subplots were a staple in that series.

I wouldn't have liked to have to kill one of the engineers though, since I like them all.

[Jull3]

gamer_girl wrote...

Lol this is just so strange. Most of the guys I've met do the whole stare-20-degrees-too-low-thing. The normal ones are a minority. Though it seems to be a majority here. O_o

Late but I just got back. The thing is, it's the internet. Most guys are either genuwinely good, or lying. Can't be sure either way. Also, I will glance at the 'twins' as you say Gamer, but I will also look at her eyes, her lips, and her face. I'm a guy, and I'm also a booby lover.

That's me being honest, if I were to lie

"I'm going to genuwinely take your personality into account first, listen to your feelings, and only watch your face while we talk, and only after the first three dates will I glance at your blessings."

Just sayin' true story.

On topic ish, do you think there are McDonalds in Mass Effect, and if so, what the other races think of em.

[exelsis]

TrueMadayar wrote...

@gamer @Unschuld You will learn whom to ignore here, sooner or later...there is a certain pointlessness. I met brick walls that would more likely agree to reason.

Anyway, since I posted Dusty Everman's plot snip earlier: Would you have liked a saboteur-on-the-Normandy subscript, where one in Engineering basically has to die?

I don't see how that would work. How does a sabotuer get on the ship now that it has constant guards again like in ME1? I see only the potential for ever more plotholes.

[TrueMadayar]

Dilandau3000 wrote...
ME already reminds me a lot of Wing Commander, and saboteur/traitor subplots were a staple in that series.

I wouldn't have liked to have to kill one of the engineers though, since I like them all.

Agreed...given the choice, I would reluctantly have picked Adams, but I would have hated the plot. I believe nobody here would've left Tali in Engineering, I guess...

[Deoku]

TrueMadayar wrote...

@gamer @Unschuld You will learn whom to ignore here, sooner or later...there is a certain pointlessness. I met brick walls that would more likely agree to reason.

Anyway, since I posted Dusty Everman's plot snip earlier: Would you have liked a saboteur-on-the-Normandy subscript, where one in Engineering basically has to die?

I'd hate having to pick who lives or dies like that Mad; kind of reminds me of the VS all over again, but I guess it would have made for a interesting moment on the ship.  Then again ME3 was full of those choices, so...guess it wouldn't have been anymore difficult than the other choices made.

Modifié par Deoku, 05 mai 2012 - 05:15 .

[Unschuld]

exelsis wrote...
Yeah, I'd have to admit that significant portions of their fanbase abandoning them forever to be a serious problem for bioware.

Well, if they're that impatient then those fans sucked anyways. (my opinion)

@Madayar 
Believe me, I know, but that reaction usually reserved for the intentionally obtuse.

Modifié par Unschuld, 05 mai 2012 - 05:14 .

[Unschuld]

TrueMadayar wrote...
Anyway, since I posted Dusty Everman's plot snip earlier: Would you have liked a saboteur-on-the-Normandy subscript, where one in Engineering basically has to die?

I would have loved that. The more difficult decisions in the game, the better. I'd feel pretty bad if any of them had to die. The genophage mission alone had me gnashing my teeth the whole way through.

Modifié par Unschuld, 05 mai 2012 - 05:16 .