Disappointed

[Beach23BoyP]

Originally Posted by Dactyl

I have to concur that there are major problems with OOTP8.

I've not seen any "major problems".

Originally Posted by Dactyl

Or, for another example, go to a team's BA Top Prospects report and click on one of those prospects names. That will cause a crash to the desktop.

I've never experienced this.

Originally Posted by Dactyl

I'm sorry, but that's a poor way to treat your customers.

Markus and his small gang have always treated us good. They go out of their way to insure that us "customers" are happy. I know, I've been here since 3.2

Originally Posted by Dactyl

they might do better with a annual subscription model.

None of us have ever paid for OOTP twice or three times in a year. Annual subscription is basically what we have now!

Originally Posted by Dactyl

That way their customers wouldn't feel cheated when one version is just abandoned in favor of a new one

Markus has never "abandoned a version" -- I felt cheated (my time) reading your post.

[Another Mike D]

Originally Posted by jm47048

Not to throw fuel on the fire, but the problems that you mention are minor. The game functions, has reasonable realisitc performance, and depth not seen in any competition.

I don't really concur with this statement. Running an online league, it's down right annoying that I have to keep manually adjusting budgets (because the game sets your current year budget and never changes, even if you are drawing 2x more fans and are on pace to double revenue. I even set "all money available" and the game still won't let people spend. The finance engine is buggy as all get out (not to mention the game NEVER uses the $$ I set for good, great, star, etc players). The game does function, has reasonable performance (so long as you continually tweak league totals and development) and depth. It does not mean the problems are minor.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by jm47048

To say that there is such a thing as bug-free software is a bogus and illogical statement. It doesn't exist.

False. Bug-free software does exist.

Now complex bug-free software may not exist. But bug-free software does.

[sixto]

Originally Posted by Dactyl

That isn't really the issue though. I cited those two problems as examples. I could give more. The point is that the bugs in OOTP8 aren't being addressed by the developers. I can understand that there will be problems in software when it is released to the public, but a developer is ethically bound to remedy those problems. That's part of the implicit contract I make with him when I purchase his product.

You are making an understandable mistake. This forum is not really for discussion of issues that you want fixed. It's meant only for those who fully support the game and think the only changes that could be made to it are the changes that Markus wants to make.

However, there is a forum for discussion of your sorts of issues: Front Office Football Central - Powered by vBulletin

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

False. Bug-free software does exist.

Now complex bug-free software may not exist. But bug-free software does.

Good observation. And considering the complexity of this game . . .

[Edit: . . . it's a pretty darned good product.]

[jm47048]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

May be true in the software you have.

No, it is ALWAYS true. There is no scientific evidence that there is bug-free software anywhere on any computer system. Even a "hello world" program will have bugs in it, from using the libraries and other code that it takes in to build itself. There just is no such thing. This is documented in scientific journals, by IEEE, ACM, and other professional organizations. Games, business software, even your chat programs all have bugs of some kind or another. That is not to say that bugs are a reflection of bad behavior. There could be faulty design, bad implementation, wrong requirements, etc. So as good a programmer as Marcus is, I am sure he would agree with me, and I don't find fault in what he does, even if there are bugs. Having worked in games, as well as other types of software, I perhaps understand that challanges that programmers and engineers face more completly.

[jm47048]

Originally Posted by kckid4u

Game crashes due to the quickstart isn't a minor issue, and it's happening to alot of people who try to use it. Makes me wonder if the quickstart was play tested at all.

Yada yada yada.

Well, that may be true. I don't use the feature so it is possible I am incorrect here. But in general, most bugs found are minor.

[Treches]

Originally Posted by jm47048

Well, that may be true. I don't use the feature so it is possible I am incorrect here. But in general, most bugs found are minor.

Correct, but the bug may be minor coding-wise and still be a major inconvenience in order to enjoy the product, 'cause this relies heavily on the customer's end, on how he uses the game, which features he's interested in, which ones he uses the most and whatnot. Therefore, a bug may be minor or even irrelevant to some and nevertheless drive other away from the product. Besides, a bad implementation of a feature, while not a bug, might be as frustrating, if not more.

As for play-testing this or that part of the game, as obvious as it is, all what testers do is test; they try stuff and post the issues they find. Then, is the developer the one who has to find the bug and fix it. Certainly, in a game like this (massive, with endless scenarios to be monitored by a bunch of people during their free time) testers will always overlook issues, but is not rare at all that a bug or malfunction is posted, re-posted and re-re-posted, the developer simply can't find the bug in the code and, thus, leaves it there intact.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by jm47048

No, it is ALWAYS true. There is no scientific evidence that there is bug-free software anywhere on any computer system.

This is simply utter nonsense. Bug-free software exists. Businesses have been running numerous bug-free COBOL programs for decades. There are many examples of it. Claiming it doesn't exist is just silly. Heck, companies even make development tools for creating it.

Escher Technologies - Products - Bug-free Software

[jm47048]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

This is simply utter nonsense. Bug-free software exists. Businesses have been running numerous bug-free COBOL programs for decades. There are many examples of it. Claiming it doesn't exist is just silly. Heck, companies even make development tools for creating it.

Escher Technologies - Products - Bug-free Software

And wht if there are bugs in the tool you describe in this link above? Read this below from a Wikipedia article that has valid scientific citations (not corporate advertising). I have said my peace, but please... if you're going to comment on software development, please educate yourself. I am not going to fight about it, but the fact doesn't change just because you post a link to some corporate product no one has ever heard of that tells me they promise my software will be bug free. That is arrogant of them.

To see the full article, please go here:

Software bug - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bug management
It is common practice for software to be released with known bugs that are considered non-critical. While software products contain an unknown number of unknown bugs when shipped, measurements during the testing may provide a statistically reliable estimate of the number of likely bugs remaining. Most big software projects maintain a list of "known bugs". This list inform users about bugs that are not fixed in the current release, or not fixed at all, and often a workaround is offered additionally.
There are various reasons for such a list:

• The developers often don't have time to fix all non-severe bugs.
• The bug could be fixed in a new version or patch that is not yet released.
• The changes to the code required to fix the bug would be large, and would bring with them the chance of introducing other bugs into the system.

Given the above, it is often considered impossible to write completely bug-free software of any real complexity. So bugs are categorized by severity, and low-severity non-critical bugs are tolerated, as they do not impact the proper operation of the system, for the majority of users. NASA's SATC managed to reduce number of errors to fewer than 0.1 per 1000 lines of code (SLOC) but this was not felt to be feasible for any real world projects.
One school of thought, popularized by Eric S. Raymond as Linus's Law in his essay The Cathedral and the Bazaar, holds that popular open-source software holds a better chance of having few or no bugs than other software, because "given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow".<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-10>[11]</SUP> This assertion has been disputed, however: computer security specialist Elias Levy wrote that "it is easy to hide vulnerabilities in complex, little understood and undocumented source code," because, "even if people are reviewing the code, that doesn't mean they're qualified to do so."<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-11>[12]</SUP>

[jm47048]

So to go back to my original point, without getting into a fight, Marcus does a fantastic job. If there are some bugs in the product, even with the quickstart, there still is not a better product out there, and I have tried most of them. Marcus creates a game with more depth and immersion then any other development company out there doing similar products. The best part about the game is that it is about the stats, not the cool ESPN looking graphics that you see on MLB2k8 or whatever the latest is out right now. In any rate, I don't want to keep kissing Marcus' but either, because we all do that enough, but suffice to say he does a great job, even if he isn't perfect. I also think that 34.95 or whatever the cost of the game is, is more then reasonable given competitor prices. And no, it is not "I get what I pay for." The price really is good, and the game does have great appeal. You know what... if the quick start isn't working so well, don't use it and create the league by hand... most of us do that anyway.

There... said my peace.

[jm47048]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

This is simply utter nonsense. Bug-free software exists. Businesses have been running numerous bug-free COBOL programs for decades. There are many examples of it. Claiming it doesn't exist is just silly. Heck, companies even make development tools for creating it.

Escher Technologies - Products - Bug-free Software

Oh, and one more thing... before you pick apart my response and tell me that there are no bugs in non-complex software, please define what you mean by non-complex, or simple software. What is your criteria? How is that a metric that can be reproduced? Are we talking about Hello World programs? Pong? What about the compiler? What about the design of the software? The requirements? The implementation? Bugs don't have to be code problems. They can be design errors, wrong requirements, bad test plans, lots of things.

I want to state though that I don't think Marcus is guilty of this, I am just making a point. Bug free... its a myth.

[SittingDuck]

Originally Posted by BaseballMan

well arent the patches and updates pretty much free anyway?
And as for new versions whats the difference between buying a new version and having a yearly subscription? The price might be a little lower but they usually offer a discount.

Well, I am not sure I want to look at it that way. I wouldn't buy a car that purports to steer in both directions and stop effeciently and get acceptable gas mileage, and then find out the car did things at about 50-75% of what was marketed.

Not a direct correlation, I know.

But the gaming industry has accepted that it will run out new titles chock full of 'features', which really are the carrots that they dangle before buyer's faces. Of course, only a certain percentage of the features work adequately, but boy does it make me want to buy it. The developers recognize they will be putting out products that aren't as efficiently developed as they know they should be (bugs worked out), but also recognize they have 'grace' periods in which to address these issues via patches.

I put it to you that if developers did not issue patches, no one would buy their products. The industry would have to retool how it does business and produce much more effectively designed product. The objective is for the developers to always have something new to offer for sale, plain and simple, and this is why they are keen to 'move on' to the next version. Sales! Praise the Lord.

If the auto industry or any other industry such as computer, home appliance, etc put out stuff as riddled as the gaming industry does, those various companies would dry up over night. You KNOW you wouldn't buy something that worked so inefficiently, not when it costs THAT much money. But we let them skate by, so long as they spend some time grooming a few problems when they have some time (away from developing the next greatest version!!!).

So no, they aren't free. They are how this weird little bit of business works, very differently than most businesses of product.

All that said - and the above isn't directed at OOTPD specifically - I still love OOTP8.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by jm47048

And wht if there are bugs in the tool you describe in this link above?

Dude, you need to go back and read what I wrote. There ARE bug-free programs. There may not be any complex bug-free programs, but there are bug-free programs. The business world is full of them.

[jm47048]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Dude, you need to go back and read what I wrote. There ARE bug-free programs. There may not be any complex bug-free programs, but there are bug-free programs. The business world is full of them.

Whatever. You win. I guess my graduate level education and industry experience in computer science and software engineering doesn't amount to anything. Thanks for the education. I will e-mail all of my professors and tell them that all of their PhD's are useless too. And when they ask me why I think that, I can direct them here.

[SittingDuck]

I always appreciate how we can all come to a sound, friendly agreement on things.

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by SittingDuck

I always appreciate how we can all come to a sound.

Fixed that for you. Sort of like a steady buzzing or humming noise.

[SittingDuck]

Really? I always thought it was a short, abrupt tooting sound.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by jm47048

Whatever. You win. I guess my graduate level education and industry experience in computer science and software engineering doesn't amount to anything. Thanks for the education. I will e-mail all of my professors and tell them that all of their PhD's are useless too. And when they ask me why I think that, I can direct them here.

Or I could do the same with my graduate education and corporate experience. Dude, you are living in Fantasy Land. Talk to someone who has written bug-free payroll software in COBOL instead of someone who spends his time theorizing about why people can't possibly do it.

It is possible to write bug-free software by applying rigor to the design and implementation process.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by SittingDuck

I always appreciate how we can all come to a sound, friendly agreement on things.

I always enjoy people who tell me that things I have seen can't exist, that things I've done or seen done can't be done, and that things that are inherently possible are somehow magically impossible. Eggheads...they always give me a good laugh.