Multiplayer vs. Signleplayer player games and QA allocation

[Spidee]

I think I asked this question before and got no response, but I will try again.

What percentages of games are played as SP/MP and how much of QA time is dedicated to SP/MP?

 

[Jiav]

did you miss the 2.2 "shitstorm"?

this should answer your question in terms of QA

little to none for both

as a multiplayer only person i can ensure you that bugs, exploits and desync problems specifically for multiplayer get almost no attention, if at all.

Some exploits get fixed after months of waiting however and some desyncs also get fixed from time to time. I am sure the stellaris team is trying their best but MP simply is not a priority.

 

[Attitude Adjuster]

Was wondering this myself. If you play multiplayer without AI you'll notice that performance is generally much improved.

Obviously without the AI there are a lot less calculations to do, and without AI present in games you obviously dont get an impression of how bad it's handling the game.

So its kind of easy to see how people might think performance was fine before release if they overwhelmingly played MP.

I even remember eyeing up the dev clashes' later episodes with the sole intent of getting a look at late game performance, and it seemed reasonably smooth compared to what players have to go through now.

Quite honestly though i think it more than likely that the issues were identified and that some SP was undertaken. But dev teams don't get to decided when things are released, dudes with suits and a severe case of UWSI are the ones that get to decide release dates.

 

[Spidee]

As a SP only person, I have the feeling that the testing is done only MP, so I want someone to disperse that feeling.
Also it is an attempt to send a message to the suits, to look at this ratio and possibly adjust it.

 

[AlanC9]

Everyone always feels that the other guys got all the QA.

 

[ragehavoc]

I believe the main issue with their QA is that the same people who are working on the next expansion are also working on QA / fixes, at the same exact time, and since PDX pushes out content as fast as possible, the entire QA system is the least important to them.
This was fine when their games were simple and basic or outsourced, but games are becoming more and more complex, and their system of doing things simply doesn't work anymore.
Unfortunately, because PDX has recently become a publicly traded company, they now only care about profits, which means until their poor management starts becoming a serious cost issue, they wont be changing anything anytime soon.
So their games will just be getting worse and worse with quality.

 

[Fourthspartan56]

did you miss the 2.2 "shitstorm"?

this should answer your question in terms of QA

little to none for both

as a multiplayer only person i can ensure you that bugs, exploits and desync problems specifically for multiplayer get almost no attention, if at all.

Some exploits get fixed after months of waiting however and some desyncs also get fixed from time to time.

This seems dreadfully illogical, the existence of bugs or even many bugs does not mean that little to no QA was done.

If QA solves 60% of 500 bugs then there would still be 200 bugs left, but that's hardly nothing.

I am not defending the status-quo or saying that people shouldn't criticize the state of the game, but as someone who strongly believes in logic and reason, your argument just doesn't make sense.

 

[AlanC9]

I presume that's just sloppy language. "Little to none" doesn't mean the same thing as "grossly inadequate," but the latter is probably the operative concept.

 

[matsci]

I presume that's just sloppy language. "Little to none" doesn't mean the same thing as "grossly inadequate," but the latter is probably the operative concept.

They literally shipped a patch where two out of three endgame crisis don't work becouse the AI wasn't finished. Its just Lableded Todo

 

[Spidee]

Folks, please let's not derail the quesiton with a question on the amount of QA. I just want to know those 2 percentages.

 

[Jiav]

This seems dreadfully illogical, the existence of bugs or even many bugs does not mean that little to no QA was done.

If QA solves 60% of 500 bugs then there would still be 200 bugs left, but that's hardly nothing.

I am not defending the status-quo or saying that people shouldn't criticize the state of the game, but as someone who strongly believes in logic and reason, your argument just doesn't make sense.

Actually your answer sounds illogical to me. If 60% of 500 bugs get fixed due to QA that is all things considered still next to nothing in modern day game development. Any update or game which launches in the state of 2.2 is simply unacceptable, meaning not enough QA has been done. Any meaningful polish would have atleast get rid of 90% of all "bugs" or broken features to provide a decent state of the game. So atleast in my book that means almost no QA has been done, simply because if enough QA would have been done the game would actually be much more enjoyable. Even in the gamecode the devs have left behind "to do lists"... if whats sufficient or even good QA for you, thats fine.

The QA team supposedly didn't even figure out the market exploit which a regular player noticed after a solid hour of playing to provide one example.

Folks, please let's not derail the quesiton with a question on the amount of QA. I just want to know those 2 percentages.

No one but a dev can answer this. I am just stating from my experience with multiplayer that issues that have been around since 1.9.1 (utopia) still are around in 2.2

For example 2 issues that have been around since a solid year now:

Tributes still paying taxes to their overlord while they are in a war of independence. Multiple tributes cannot declare war of indepence at once (if not guaranteed by a 3rd empire), since if one rises up the others automatically side with their overlord and therefore cannot declare war on him as well.

Several fleet upgrade exploits were around for almost a year with no fix. And so on.

 

[Blurb]

Folks, please let's not derail the quesiton with a question on the amount of QA. I just want to know those 2 percentages.

Your question inevitably touches on the total amount of QA done, the current direction of the thread should not surprise you.
As for answering your question, only a Paradox insider would be able to provide a reasonable estimate. How am I supposed to know what's going on inside that studio?

 

[Molikroth]

Even if they do come in here and tell you it's 75%/25% SP/MP what would that solve? It wouldn't change the cries of "Not enough Q&A".

I pulled those numbers out of my butt so please don't take them seriously.

 

[Mikhail_Mengsk]

Your question inevitably touches on the total amount of QA done, the current direction of the thread should not surprise you.
As for answering your question, only a Paradox insider would be able to provide a reasonable estimate. How am I supposed to know what's going on inside that studio?

Well, his question is probably directed to them.

 

[Spidee]

Well, his question is probably directed to them.

Correct.
Well my guess is 10% SP, 90% MP. Which would then the basis to say, please increase the SP, because that in future will expose the AI misbehaviour earlier.

 

[Molikroth]

Correct.
Well my guess is 10% SP, 90% MP. Which would then the basis to say, please increase the SP, because that in future will expose the AI misbehaviour earlier.

Ah, so you want a "I told you so" moment. Then they're even less likely to reply to this post.

 

[Anemetius]

With Stellaris peformance you cant play MP, be real.

 

[Spidee]

Ah, so you want a "I told you so" moment. Then they're even less likely to reply to this post.

I know they won't...I just want this question to show up in their post mortem of "what went wring with this release".

 

[AlanC9]

Or you're just wrong and they'll completely ignore this.

 

[Spidee]

Or you're just wrong and they'll completely ignore this.

That is a possibility, maybe even a likelihood, but I give it a shot. Costs me only a few moments on the keyboard. I want Stellaris to get better and I think this question is part (small) of the improvement process.