Game Update Delay

[britonlongbow]

Funny how a thread about a week's delay in an update gets 8 pages (150'ish replies).

But the topic isn't just about the weeks delay but more about the conduct of a company that gives an outline of when it will release products and then not meeting their own deadline is acceptable to the consumer. Also weather the unhappy consumer should continue giving money to the negligent company

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

But the topic isn't just about the weeks delay but more about the conduct of a company that gives an outline of when it will release products and then not meeting their own deadline is acceptable to the consumer. Also weather the unhappy consumer should continue giving money to the negligent company

 

An outline is not equivalent to a deadline. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Especially when you're talking about a piece of software. Then again, we've got some pretty imaginative members in our community. :)

[xxshady]

But the topic isn't just about the weeks delay but more about the conduct of a company that gives an outline of when it will release products and then not meeting their own deadline is acceptable to the consumer. Also weather the unhappy consumer should continue giving money to the negligent company

 

An outline is not equivalent to a deadline. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Especially when you're talking about a piece of software. Then again, we've got some pretty imaginative members in our community. :)

 

Agreed, the outcry is a bit ridiculous.

[britonlongbow]

Funny how a thread about a week's delay in an update gets 8 pages (150'ish replies).

But the topic isn't just about the weeks delay but more about the conduct of a company that gives an outline of when it will release products and then not meeting their own deadline is acceptable to the consumer. Also weather the unhappy consumer should continue giving money to the negligent company

 

Our final update this month starts with a rework of our old treasure trails

 

They easily could have said these are the updates we hope to release this month but BTS phrases everything in the terms of what Jagex will do that month. IMO they should can BTS because the type of business jagex runs can be unpredictable and giving a set a things that you say you will do in x time frame when you know that your company has a history of delaying projects isn't going to be extremely accurate.

[Makoto_the_Phoenix]

Our final update this month starts with a rework of our old treasure trails

They easily could have said these are the updates we hope to release this month but BTS phrases everything in the terms of what Jagex will do that month. IMO they should can BTS because the type of business jagex runs can be unpredictable and giving a set a things that you say you will do in x time frame when you know that your company has a history of delaying projects isn't going to be extremely accurate.

 

Okay, I'll bite - first, since you believe that Jagex has a history of delaying projects, then why did you take what the BTS said at face value (that is to say, why did you take the BTS as a bona fide deadline instead of a desired outcome)?

 

Second, they did get rid of the BTS for a while. This is the second month it's been back. It was canned for reasons just like this - players just couldn't accept that, sometimes, bad things happen with software. They tried the new approach and got just as much flak for not revealing the update(s) for the month, so they just went back to the old fashioned BTS. Didn't get them much further as far as appeasing the masses.

 

Third, I will agree that the wording in the BTS is ambiguous enough to mislead someone into a false sense of deadlines. However, you should always take outlines (yes, outlines) with a grain of salt. Expect the unexpected, and anticipate delays/reworks/updates. That's just how software works.

[britonlongbow]

Our final update this month starts with a rework of our old treasure trails

They easily could have said these are the updates we hope to release this month but BTS phrases everything in the terms of what Jagex will do that month. IMO they should can BTS because the type of business jagex runs can be unpredictable and giving a set a things that you say you will do in x time frame when you know that your company has a history of delaying projects isn't going to be extremely accurate.

 

Okay, I'll bite - first, since you believe that Jagex has a history of delaying projects, then why did you take what the BTS said at face value (that is to say, why did you take the BTS as a bona fide deadline instead of a desired outcome)?

 

Second, they did get rid of the BTS for a while. This is the second month it's been back. It was canned for reasons just like this - players just couldn't accept that, sometimes, bad things happen with software. They tried the new approach and got just as much flak for not revealing the update(s) for the month, so they just went back to the old fashioned BTS. Didn't get them much further as far as appeasing the masses.

 

Third, I will agree that the wording in the BTS is ambiguous enough to mislead someone into a false sense of deadlines. However, you should always take outlines (yes, outlines) with a grain of salt. Expect the unexpected, and anticipate delays/reworks/updates. That's just how software works.

The problem I am attempting to point out is that Jagex has set themselves up for failure with BTS because there are 2 possible results at the end of the month

1. You release all the updates in BTS which is what everyone is expecting ( You don't see alot of "Way to go Jagex for releasing all the BTS updates threads)

2. You don't release all the updates from BTS and people are disappointed

 

I'm not upset that Jagex didn't release everything in BTS, I just think it's not wise to do BTS when the only reaction you can get is indifference or disappointment

[Blutters]

I agree with BritonLongbow's first post.

The wording is basically such:

"Here are the products we will be releasing and when they will be available."

- rather than -

"Here are the products we plan to release and when. However, please remember that things can't always go according to schedule!"

 

They don't need to remove the BTS, and I'd hate it if they went to "expansion pack mode" like other games. They've always done near-weekly updates; this is one of the things that makes RuneScape special. Also, many people would blow through all the content in the "expansions" and be bored which could lead to more complaining than currently.

What they should do instead is say "This is what we *hope* to release this month but please bear with us if we are unable to!" Alternatively, they could release a long-term BTS (2-3 months possibly) of content they have ready or that is close to being ready. That way, the only "deadline" they have is for the final week.

 

Also, I think that people are a little more annoyed this time around both because this was by far the most anticipated update and that the Dungeoneering 1.5 update was slightly delayed.

[Den]

Thought i'd add this:

 

[HerHero]

I personally like BTS. For economical reasons... I'm tight on cash, and after you cut through all the advertisement you can really see if the month is worth $5 or not :P

[wioneo]

I'd appreciate compensation for the potential loss from not flipping during the delay.

[muggiwhplar]

I feel that BTS shouldn't be described as an "outline." If it were an outline, I don't think Jagex would feel obligated to create a forum post which describes the lack of updates as "delays."

 

If BTS is an "outline," then what do you call this?

[mario_sunny]

This is exactly why Jagex doesn't like BTS in the first place, people expect them to follow them strictly, which just doesn't happen sometimes. Really I was fine with no BTS; BTS was like Jagex presenting a summary to a story without the readers even reading the story. I liked the excitement of not knowing what updates we would receive.

This point has been made over and over and over and over and over. Who reads threads anymore?

 

Sorry, I'm usually not one of those typical tl;dr guys, infact I did read through the first three pages. You can't expect me to spend 30 minutes of my time reading all the arguements made prior to my post. To me its not worth the time. Now if the thread was shorter then certainly I would spend time going over the thread and see what the current viewpoint is, but with a 7 page thread I just said no-thanks.

 

Sorry if I made you mad, I didn't want to.

[wioneo]

This is exactly why Jagex doesn't like BTS in the first place, people expect them to follow them strictly, which just doesn't happen sometimes. Really I was fine with no BTS; BTS was like Jagex presenting a summary to a story without the readers even reading the story. I liked the excitement of not knowing what updates we would receive.

This point has been made over and over and over and over and over. Who reads threads anymore?

 

Sorry, I'm usually not one of those typical tl;dr guys, infact I did read through the first three pages. You can't expect me to spend 30 minutes of my time reading all the arguements made prior to my post. To me its not worth the time. Now if the thread was shorter then certainly I would spend time going over the thread and see what the current viewpoint is, but with a 7 page thread I just said no-thanks.

 

Sorry if I made you mad, I didn't want to.

 

tldr

[mario_sunny]

This is exactly why Jagex doesn't like BTS in the first place, people expect them to follow them strictly, which just doesn't happen sometimes. Really I was fine with no BTS; BTS was like Jagex presenting a summary to a story without the readers even reading the story. I liked the excitement of not knowing what updates we would receive.

This point has been made over and over and over and over and over. Who reads threads anymore?

 

Sorry, I'm usually not one of those typical tl;dr guys, infact I did read through the first three pages. You can't expect me to spend 30 minutes of my time reading all the arguements made prior to my post. To me its not worth the time. Now if the thread was shorter then certainly I would spend time going over the thread and see what the current viewpoint is, but with a 7 page thread I just said no-thanks.

 

Sorry if I made you mad, I didn't want to.

 

tldr

 

I'm sorry.

[Blutters]

Wait, I think I get why they need Z-Biasing before they can release the update...

Z-Biasing is supposed to make models appear in the correct order and overlap correctly, right?

Well the biggest problem with incorrect overlapping is hats and hair, and headgear encompasses of the largest number of Treasure Trail items...

 

Lol just one of those epiphany kind of things.

[xxshady]

Wait, I think I get why they need Z-Biasing before they can release the update...

Z-Biasing is supposed to make models appear in the correct order and overlap correctly, right?

Well the biggest problem with incorrect overlapping is hats and hair, and headgear encompasses of the largest number of Treasure Trail items...

 

Lol just one of those epiphany kind of things.

 

Zbiasing are the flickering bugs. What they are adding is Zbuffering.. to solve these bugs. The reason why this was tied to the TT update was because they coded the update in the new version of the engine. This was all stated on the thread... If they can't solve the engine problem they are going to recode it in the old engine.

[Blutters]

Wait, I think I get why they need Z-Biasing before they can release the update...

Z-Biasing is supposed to make models appear in the correct order and overlap correctly, right?

Well the biggest problem with incorrect overlapping is hats and hair, and headgear encompasses of the largest number of Treasure Trail items...

 

Lol just one of those epiphany kind of things.

 

Zbiasing are the flickering bugs. What they are adding is Zbuffering.. to solve these bugs. The reason why this was tied to the TT update was because they coded the update in the new version of the engine. This was all stated on the thread... If they can't solve the engine problem they are going to recode it in the old engine.

"When we’re rendering our 3D scene, historically we have sorted all of our world entities (such as players, walls, particle effects etc) into view depth order. We then render them in this order, from furthest away to closest, giving the view you would expect, where nearer things appear over far things. Whilst this has the advantage of being quite fast, it’s also somewhat inflexible, and leads to various graphical glitches that you’re probably familiar with if you play in the ‘Safe mode’ or ‘Software’ graphics modes, whereby things appear to draw on top of - or through - each other when they shouldn’t (player capes are an excellent example of this). With this update, we’ve moved to using an industry-standard technique called ‘Z-buffering’, which allows us to be a lot more flexible with our 3D rendering in the future. As an example, it allows us to have player kit or animations which extend outside of the square on which your character is standing. It also allows for more complex models and a number of other improvements which we’ve been wanting to do for a while.”

 

~ Mod Chris E

:mellow: :?:

- Sorry, I should have included my "evidence" in my original post.

[spooferfish]

At least they have a reason, instead of just saying nothing and putting i out a week late like nothing happened... Really looking forward to the update for clues, even though I'll be at work when it happen. :S

[Blutters]

Oh, I kinda came to a conclusion that British players are at an advantage update time-wise. I was told that updates happen at latest around 5:00pm or so Britanese time, because that's the end of a workday, although I know they've occured as early as 7:00am for myself (central timezone USA). Obviously there would be a lot more people up and about at 5:00pm than 7:00am. Not that there's anything to be done about that, except maybe move, lol. This thought process was of course after my thinking that I had some kind of advantage since I'm getting up early anyway. Oh, um, don't ask what I'm doing up right now though.

[xxshady]

"When were rendering our 3D scene, historically we have sorted all of our world entities (such as players, walls, particle effects etc) into view depth order. We then render them in this order, from furthest away to closest, giving the view you would expect, where nearer things appear over far things. Whilst this has the

advantage of being quite fast, its also somewhat inflexible, and leads to various graphical glitches that youre probably familiar with if you play in the Safe mode or Software graphics modes, whereby things appear to draw on top of - or through - each other when they shouldnt (player capes are an excellent example of this). With this update, weve moved to using an industry-standard technique called Z-buffering, which allows us to be a lot more flexible with our 3D rendering in the future. As an example, it allows us to have player kit or animations extend outside of the square on which your character is standing. It also allows for more complex models and a number of other improvements which weve been wanting to do for a while.

 

~ Mod Chris E

 

 

:mellow: :?:

- Sorry, I should have included my "evidence" in my original post.

 

That's not a response to my post, unless your saying that zbiasing doesn't cause flickering, in which case you would be wrong. In your original post you mistook zbuffering for zbias bugs so I think a little research on your part would clear up your apparent confusion.

[Blutters]

Um, okay, I just got my vocab mixed up? Chill out lol. I'm not arguing about what Z-B[insert rest here] IS, because to be honest I've never heard of either. I drew my conclusion from the quote that was presented on this thread.

If you actually wanted to be helpful rather than argumentative you would've said something like, "Hey GaVaTi, I believe you meant Z-Buffering, not Z-Biasing. Z-Buffering is..."

As if any of this matters much now.

 

...

Yay, maybe hair and hats and skillcapes will appear correctly now! I guess it was worth waiting an extra week to get some of the oldest graphical issues sorted out!

[xxshady]

Um, okay, I just got my vocab mixed up? Chill out lol. I'm not arguing about what Z-B[insert rest here] IS, because to be honest I've never heard of either. I drew my conclusion from the quote that was presented on this thread.

If you actually wanted to be helpful rather than argumentative you would've said something like, "Hey GaVaTi, I believe you meant Z-Buffering, not Z-Biasing. Z-Buffering is..."

As if any of this matters much now.

 

...

Yay, maybe hair and hats and skillcapes will appear correctly now! I guess it was worth waiting an extra week to get some of the oldest graphical issues sorted out!

 

Except I already tried to be polite and helpful by informing you of your incorrect vocabulary, but you responded with a completely irrelevant quote from the RSOF thread.

 

In other words: U mad?

[Pirkka]

Information Update:

 

The game update will not be launched today (Monday 2nd). We had to perform a rollback to the game engine (don't worry, this did not affect your in-game accounts!) and, if all goes well, we are aiming to launch on Tuesday.

 

Thank you for your patience!

[SanNo1]

Information Update:

 

The game update will not be launched today (Monday 2nd). We had to perform a rollback to the game engine (don't worry, this did not affect your in-game accounts!) and, if all goes well, we are aiming to launch on Tuesday.

 

Thank you for your patience!

Glad they said this this early, wouldn't want to spend another day lurking rsof while slaying. :ohnoes:

[Den]

Information Update:

 

The game update will not be launched today (Monday 2nd). We had to perform a rollback to the game engine (don't worry, this did not affect your in-game accounts!) and, if all goes well, we are aiming to launch on Tuesday.

 

Thank you for your patience!

 

Good, because I wont be home later today. :P

 

Tuesday/wednesday please.