How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory

So what do you guys think of this comment when thinking about Valheim? Seems the devs took a huge amount of time to bug fix the game and as a result they fell behind the players expectations of how far along in content development they should be. I grapped the text of a download captions so that's why it's written the way it is.

Quote:
However unfortunately perpetually maintaining our game in a state of perfect stability is not feasible and is actually quite detrimental to the development of the game and so you might be wondering like in what ways is having a stable game detrimental to the development of the game well first of all it kind of depends on what your definition of stability is or stable is okay so there are some people I have seen online who say there should be no bugs in a game right it's unacceptable for the there to be bugs but regardless of whether you're not in Early Access uh having a game that is perfectly uh bug free at least the game is complex as our one you know in our particular case where we have three million plus people playing on varying Hardware with you know varying Windows versions and Driver versions they may or may not be up to date they might be mods involved 100 stability on all all machines is simply not something that is actually viable and so we need to find an acceptable level of stability and so that's the first thing that can be detrimental to development you know chasing that that perfect stability in a game is just it's just going to lead us astray and it's not really something that's attainable right so we can't do that not only that but maintaining a high level of stability during active development is also incredibly inefficient okay this is because it would mean uh consistently undoing and redoing work that we've done before in order to stabilize the game when the game's design is constantly changing and new features are being added not only that but adding new features risks instability anyway as it is whether or not we're redoing and undoing work so this is just something that we we can't escape either and long term this makes no sense because it would mean that it'll take us like I don't know twice as long to finish the game when we could just do it in half the amount of the time if we were to accept some level of growing pains right so bear in mind that we've been working on satisfactory for like six or seven years now and if we were chasing all these bugs to clean them all up at every possible step of the way we wouldn't be nearly as far in development as we are now financially this is awful and then maybe even interest wise you guys wouldn't be getting any new stuff and it would get very boring you know the game just might become irrelevant you know.

End Quote:

So as soon as I've seen this video I just thought 100% this applied to Valheim the the issues Jace mentions seem applicable.
6:13 pm, January 20, 2023
OmegaFreak01 0 comments 0 likes

OmegaFreak01 replied to How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory January 20, 2023 @ 10:18:31 am PST

Originally posted by jonnin:
I love this. This game has less bugs than anything I can think of, including released big titles. There are some little things, but I haven't experienced the first serious bug since I bought in.
I highly prefer less bugs to more content. Content that does not work or causes saved game corruption, crashes, etc is not useful to me vs content that works.

I took it to meaning you can keep polishing an early access game at the cost of falling behind in development.

I would say a large issue with this game is the devs took a year out to polish the game and you can see a lot of people unhappy with how long content is taking.

I think that's just the trade off.

People who are satisfied would rather have the bugs removed, while people wanting more content would have to accept more bugs until the 1.0 update.

Turthfully I'm on the "I would of rather had more content by now" side of things.

I just thought the quote was interesting because it probably explains the community division.
9:13 pm, January 20, 2023
0 comments 0 likes

Faceplant8 replied to How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory January 20, 2023 @ 10:27:38 am PST

Not entirely a bug, but I've had Satisfactory sitting pretty much unused in my library for years waiting for them to fix controller support, but I have over 2000 hours in Valheim.

As a software developer I also consider this concerning: "maintaining a high level of stability during active development is also incredibly inefficient okay this is because it would mean uh consistently undoing and redoing work that we've done before in order to stabilize the game"

That doesn't sound like a good development model.

Incremental releases are a normal development practice. They sometimes to require patching bugs in a way that may have to be redone in the next cycle, in order to get a stable build out the door, but "consistently undoing and redoing work" is not good.
9:13 pm, January 20, 2023
0 comments 0 likes

FissionChips replied to How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory January 20, 2023 @ 11:37:03 am PST

Originally posted by OmegaFreak01:
... Seems the devs took a huge amount of time to bug fix the game and as a result they fell behind the players expectations of how far along in content development they should be. ...
IMO they fixed some rare and serious bugs, got some needed performance gains out of terrain modification, ... and then left in a bunch of bugs as well as introduced new ones.

They also weren't the players expectations, they were Iron Gates stated development road map. Between bugs and covid and a roadmap being against Steams terms in the first place they temporarily abandoned the road map, which turned out to be permanent.

As for bugs vs content: depends on the bugs. Bugs with the core game engine - games saves, not crashing for predictable reasons/coding errors, terrain edits were never going to be performant enough, etc - are vastly different problems to "system variations" etc. In short they're talking about a different level of stability vs the problems Valheim had on release. I'm not convinced the Valheim team has even considered this level of stability at all yet.
9:13 pm, January 20, 2023
0 comments 0 likes

Ratboy replied to How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory January 20, 2023 @ 11:54:46 am PST

Originally posted by FissionChips:
Originally posted by OmegaFreak01:
..
As for bugs vs content: depends on the bugs. Bugs with the core game engine - games saves, not crashing for predictable reasons/coding errors, terrain edits were never going to be performant enough, etc - are vastly different problems to "system variations" etc. In short they're talking about a different level of stability vs the problems Valheim had on release. I'm not convinced the Valheim team has even considered this level of stability at all yet.



Save game issue when disconnected from a flaky server ( anyone running it dedicated on their pc ).

Boats crashing in the middle of the water for no reason ( no waves or rocks around )

Flying seeker sounds present after you've already killed it

FPS drops to a standstill ( not when game saving on server ) and recovery

Corrupted save files causing microstutters for no player known ( or dev known it seems ) reason

Game is fun, needs major work. If the people making the game played it, they'd know how buggy it is rn.
9:13 pm, January 20, 2023
0 comments 0 likes

jonnin replied to How we Prioritise Bugs for an Early Access Game // Satisfactory January 20, 2023 @ 10:09:14 am PST

I love this. This game has less bugs than anything I can think of, including released big titles. There are some little things, but I haven't experienced the first serious bug since I bought in.
I highly prefer less bugs to more content. Content that does not work or causes saved game corruption, crashes, etc is not useful to me vs content that works.
6:13 pm, January 20, 2023
0 comments 0 likes