81 réponses à ce sujet

[pdusen]

                                                                         <<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

No excuse.

 

Or perhaps you accept banking ATMs to not work because the application is complex and therefore subject to crashing. Go ahead, tell the ATM customer not to moan and whine. The solution, according to you is to tell fellow ATM users what they need to know....which is what?.. not to use the ATM?

 

Banking industry will not accept system crashes, no matter the complexity.  But, if it is a game... so what?

 

Amazing!

 

ATMs are not even in the same galaxy as games with regard to complexity.

[Linkenski]

I don't know. As far as I remember Unreal Tournament 3 was a masterpiece from a technical point of view, only 1 year after the first games appeared, I don't recall Gears of War having significant technical issues. Now for Unreal Engine 4, you can see the progress of the new Unreal Tournament game to evaluate the engine, and I hear only good things about UE4. It is a shame, ME:A could have looked like that:

In general I'm not really that hyped for any game running on frostbite. So far, I haven't played any truly impressive game on it. I find every game on frostbite to have this weirdly tinted look and the lighting is too much. I really have no knowledge on how an engine affects the renders though, but I always thought it was quite reliant on the engine first and foremost.

 

Speaking of graphics, I also find that Arkham Knight looks so good (which is modified UE3, kind of like ME3 but taken way further) that I really doubt ME:A will even match it. Mass Effect 3 looks really, really good, even today and even compared to Arkham Knight because it has this excellent artistic tone and look in the most synthetic environments and neon-esque lighting that looks really good. (plus Bioware consistently made amazing skyboxes for the entire trilogy) and after DA:I I fear I'll just find ME:A to graphically be like half a step up and two steps backwards all the same.

[HarbingerCollector]

I never had any problems on my PC. Never ever.

because if you had no problems it means everyone else doesn't have any problem.
Genius!

[rashie]

<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

No excuse.

Or perhaps you accept banking ATMs to not work because the application is complex and therefore subject to crashing. Go ahead, tell the ATM customer not to moan and whine. The solution, according to you is to tell fellow ATM users what they need to know....which is what?.. not to use the ATM?

Banking industry will not accept system crashes, no matter the complexity. But, if it is a game... so what?

Amazing!

Much of that is because of the legal and financial implications to such a system if it did fail, both to the economy and the bank being seen as untrustworthy. Stability is a far bigger concern in COBOL financial development than it will ever be in the games industry at large, because it has far more serious consequences upon failure than if a entertainment product crashes.

[Sartoz]

ATMs are not even in the same galaxy as games with regard to complexity.

 

                                                                          <<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

LOL.

 

I guess you never wrote any ATM assembler code then..... Did you know that when I assemble the ATM code the Assembler crashed during assembly because the symbol table was overrun? That is how big the ATM code was.  I know all about complex code and stupid coders and systems analysts who couldn't find their butthole from their nosehole. Especially those that designed a system that only a 18-wheeler engine could pull but did not understand that the compmay computer was the equivalent of a 4cyl Beetle engine.... Sorry, I digress.

 

 

The point is, you seem to accept that complex games have a valid reason to crash.... a valid excuse.  My point is no matter the complexity, crashes are never acceptable.... never. 

 

 I wonder, if NASA were to hire programmers for their Orbital Systems. which attitude do you think they accept?

[pdusen]

snip

 

You know, I could sit here all day and think of new things to point out to you about how software actually works, but I kept coming up with more things to say and it just doesn't seem worth the effort now. Peace.

[Chealec]

                                                                          <<<<<<<<<<<()>>>>>>>>>>

 

LOL.

 

I guess you never wrote any ATM assembler code then..... Did you know that when I assemble the ATM code the Assembler crashed during assembly because the symbol table was overrun? That is how big the ATM code was.  I know all about complex code and stupid coders and systems analysts who couldn't find their butthole from their nosehole. Especially those that designed a system that only a 18-wheeler engine could pull but did not understand that the compmay computer was the equivalent of a 4cyl Beetle engine.... Sorry, I digress.

 

 

The point is, you seem to accept that complex games have a valid reason to crash.... a valid excuse.  My point is no matter the complexity, crashes are never acceptable.... never. 

 

 I wonder, if NASA were to hire programmers for their Orbital Systems. which attitude do you think they accept?

 

I'm guessing that ATMs are generally a fixed hardware environment - if you're building Assembly code then that's low-level, talk to the hardware stuff; which means it's a pretty fixed architecture? (not the case in the UK as far as I can tell since I've seen an ATM with a BSOD - yes, it was running Windows)

 

Games are generally a horrendous muddle of application code built on engine code built on OS interface code built on hardware interface code... all built and maintained by different companies. Few of which have reliability as their core tenet; better lighting, better particle physics, pushing around more tris and so on. They might all run on the same underlying x86/x64 architecture but the people who write the games aren't programming for that, they're programming for the engine. The people that write the engine are programming for the OS/GPU driver hooks. It's not until you get to the OS that someone is actually writing for the hardware.

 

So yes, I agree that crashes shouldn't happen but I can see why they do... and why they're more likely in entertainment software, built on tight deadlines, than say business critical applications. Different industries, different priorities.