50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

LOL, MSFS isn't going to fry your GPU!

I never said it would, and you clearly missed my point.  

An update to a GPU driver had problems.  THAT was my point.

Just like any update to any hardware or software can have problems.  Just like SU5 gave many people many problems.  From not being able to start the sim to CTD's and performance issues.  ie.  A forced update had many problems.

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Goran, I know you have commercial ties to X-Plane.

What does that have to do with anything?  I never hinted towards or mentioned X-Plane at all.  

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

But please don't come into the MSFS forum here in Avsim and "fear monger" like this.

No fear mongering.  SU5 had problems.  Facts.  Forced updates are, by other peoples posts in here, NOT desirable.  Many would prefer to opt in to an update.  

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I hope the mods can regulate people with obvious commercial ties to P3D or X-Plane that come into threads in the MSFS forum

That's the 2nd time you're mentioning X-Plane.  I posted something that suggests forced updates are not a good thing.  Why are you turning it into some X-Plane vs MSFS thing?

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

(they come into the MSFS forum mind you and make such statements, rather than staying in the P3D or X-Plane forum)

Segregation.  Hardly a positive road to go down, don't you think.  If the conversation remains civil and constructive, what's the harm?  Again, please tell me where I inferred X-Plane in my original post, and I will be happy to apologize.

50 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

and make such claims and spread "fear mongering" like this.

Not a claim.  It's a fact.  And, again, many people want a CHOICE to update.

Some updates can cause major issues.  Even Windows and MacOS have had these types of issues.  

How about we keep it constructive, instead of this vs that?  Maybe this thread won't be locked.

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by GoranM

15 minutes ago, Reader said:

I wrote "effective beta testing is a skill which few possess". You appear to have read "there should be fewer beta testers". I have worked for managers who didn't listen many times and it was not a pleasant experience.

 

You understand that beta testing for video games is usually sent out to players of the game with no qualified training in testing, right?

Like I said, if you want qualified testers that are trained, that testing is done earlier in the testing phase.  It's done by professional testers at Asobo's headquarters, who of course are trained and are following the testing process set out at Asobo.

By the time a release in the video game industry makes it to the beta testing phase, it's generally distributed to regular players of the game.  For "opt in" beta testing for many video games out there, the player that "opts in" the beta testing doesn't need to have any formal training in testing at all.

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

2 minutes ago, GoranM said:

I never said it would, and you clearly missed my point.  

An update to a GPU driver had problems.  THAT was my point.

Just like any update to any hardware or software can have problems.  Just like SU5 gave many people many problems.  From not being able to start the sim to CTD's and performance issues.  ie.  A forced update had many problems.

Some updates can cause major issues.  Even Windows and MacOS have had these types of issues.  

 

Because Goran, you have come into the MSFS forums before, and you have made comments against MSFS that have eventually contributed to getting the whole thread locked.  You are using the statement "GPU's cooked" and then mentioning SU5 in the very same post, which may lead some people to believe that MSFS will "cook" somebody's GPU.  That is "fear mongering," IMO.

Quote

How about we keep it constructive, instead of this vs that?  Maybe this thread won't be locked.

Yes, I hope so.  The moment I saw you participating in this thread, that's a bad omen.

1 minute ago, abrams_tank said:

Because Goran, you have come into the MSFS forums before, and you have made comments against MSFS that have eventually contributed to getting the whole thread locked. 

And of course, I was the only one, right?

🤦‍♂️

1 minute ago, abrams_tank said:

You are using the statement "GPU's cooked" and then mentioning SU5 in the very same post

I'm actually giving people enough credit that they realize that a bad update to MSFS will NOT cook a GPU.  If they think an MSFS update will cook a GPU, I would question their PC experience.  But ok.

3 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

That is "fear mongering," IMO.

Again, I would think they're more intelligent than that.

3 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

The moment I saw you participating in this thread, that's a bad omen.

That's interesting.  The moment I saw the notification that you quoted me, I saw that as a bad omen.  To the point where I said out loud, "Oh boy.  Here we go.  He quoted me."

Stop twisting people's posts to fit your own agenda, and just take them at face value.  Maybe threads won't get locked.

It makes perfect sense.....but it is one reason (of many at the moment) why I will not be purchasing the product any time soon.

1 minute ago, GoranM said:

And of course, I was the only one, right?

🤦‍♂️

I'm actually giving people enough credit that they realize that a bad update to MSFS will NOT cook a GPU.  If they think an MSFS update will cook a GPU, I would question their PC experience.  But ok.

Again, I would think they're more intelligent than that.

That's interesting.  The moment I saw the notification that you quoted me, I saw that as a bad omen.  To the point where I said out loud, "Oh boy.  Here we go.  He quoted me."

Stop twisting people's posts to fit your own agenda, and just take them at face value.  Maybe threads won't get locked.

Alright, let's move on then, and get back on topic? BTW, this is a topic that I created so of course, you shouldn't be surprised if I quoted you.  Anyways, let's get back on topic, alright?

17 minutes ago, GoranM said:

I never said it would, and you clearly missed my point.

No, you didn’t directly say it, you did what you usually do and used adjacency to retain some plausible deniability thus: a) updates can fry and destroy drivers b) trusting in-house beta programmes for updates is inherently risky and only irresponsible actors like Asobo would ask you to do so.

Not the first time you’ve insinuated Asobo are unethical actors, or tried to sow your much-favoured ‘seeds of suspicion’.

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by scotchegg

17 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Like I said, if you want qualified testers that are trained, that testing is done earlier in the testing phase.  It's done by trained testers at Asobo's headquarters, who of course are trained and are following the testing process set out at Asobo.By the time a release in the video game industry makes it to the beta testing phase, it's generally distributed to regular players of the game.  For "opt in" beta testing for many video games out there, the player that "opts in" the beta testing doesn't need to have any formal training in testing at all.

Once again, I wrote that "effective beta testing is a skill which few possess". I did not write that "all beta testers should be trained". 

The proposal was to open up a beta channel to everyone and the supposed result would be that do do that would result in all the bugs being caught before release to the public. I was pointing out that effective beta testing is a skill which few possess and will now go on to point out that the more likely result would be that Asobo would be showered with input that was not relevant or based entirely on self interest, such as the many posts that can already be seen in open forums. This would most likely result in the actually valuable input from those who do possess the required skills being drowned out. I look forward to your next reply to something that  I did not write.

Edited August 17, 20214 yr by Reader

If certain people don't behave I will lock this topic.

Just now, abrams_tank said:

Anyways, let's get back on topic, alright?

Always my intention

6 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

No, you didn’t directly say it, you did what you usually do and used adjacency to retain some plausible deniability thus: a) updates can fry and destroy drivers b) trusting in-house beta programmes for updates is inherently risky and only irresponsible actors like Asobo would ask you to do so.

Not the first time you’ve insinuated Asobo are unethical actors, or tried to sow your much-favoured ‘seeds of suspicion’.

And here we go again.  

Being one to experience CTD's from corrupted Windows updates in the past, that have destroyed my earlier work.  Being one who's had a fried GPU from a corrupted nvidia driver, that was NOT replaced by nvidia, and left me out about $1000.  I would have thought my input would be taken as constructive.  Shame there's always 1 or 2 that see it differently and want to twist it to fit their own agenda.  

Think whatever you want to think.  I'm certainly not going to stop you.

7 minutes ago, Reader said:

Once again, I wrote that "effective beta testing is a skill which few possess". I did not write that "all beta testers should be trained". 

The proposal was to open up a beta channel to everyone and the supposed result would be that do do that would result in all the bugs being caught before release to the public. I was pointing out that effective beta testing is a skill which few possess and will now go on to point out that the more likely result would be that Asobo would be showered with input that was not relevant or based entirely on self interest, such as the many posts that can already be seen in open forums. This would most likely result in the actually valuable input from those who do possess the required skills being drowned out. I look forward to your next reply to something that  I did not write.

Well, for me and what I have seen from video game beta testing, most beta testers in video games aren't very well trained in the first place. So I don't know what you mean by "effective beta testing is a skill which few possess" because I don't expect video game beta testers to have much testing skills at all.

So what's not to stop Asobo from doing a 300 person beta test, like they do now, so that they get more concise feedback, and then open up to a public "opt in" beta test when they are confident their release candidate from the 300 person beta test is bullet proof?

(PS. If anything, too few beta testers made it harder for Asobo to determine that a slider was really wanted by the community for the culling & pop-ins - this would not have happened if there were way more beta testers)

 

5 hours ago, Sesquashtoo said:

Well, the only 'opt out' we all have, is (no sarcasm) that I see, is to not opt out, but to 'drop out' and fly something else....(the other's....).  I guess it is what it is, and will be what it will be.  That's why I would never (personally) put all my eggs into one basket, and delete P3D (my most favorite version, etc) and XP11 (same).  Those are my two 'opt out' pathways, I guess.

That's the danger I see. MSFS has the potential to be great, but they really need to be more consistent and test updates more thoroughly. When something is not right, take your time and wait a couple weeks, maybe longer. And yes, an opt in program for betas could be perfect.

Regressions and instability are dangerous, exactly for the "opt out" strategy that you mentioned. Personally, I only have about an hour a day to fly, and not everyday. If I run MSFS and it crashes on me, it's game over. No time to see what happened, the what and the why, google the problem and so on.

I hope the devs have learned the lesson from SU5 mishaps. Reading what they say, and considering the two hotfixes, it seems so.

A.

5 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I don't know what you mean by "effective beta testing is a skill which few possess" 

That much is clear.

Based on the assumption that at this stage, Asobo are fine tuning the simulator, one would expect them to ask their beta testers to examine the changes they have made and test them. The skilled beta tester will do just that and no more. It does not need training or overbearing supervision but it does need at least an analytical mind, an ability and willingness to concentrate on the subject in question until the task is completed and attention to detail. These are not universal skills.

5 minutes ago, Reader said:

That much is clear.

Based on the assumption that at this stage, Asobo are fine tuning the simulator, one would expect them to ask their beta testers to examine the changes they have made and test them. The skilled beta tester will do just that and no more. It does not need training or overbearing supervision but it does need at least an analytical mind, an ability and willingness to concentrate on the subject in question until the task is completed and attention to detail. These are not universal skills.

Sure, so I don't see much downside if Asobo goes through their normal 300 beta testers, and when they are done with the 300 beta testers and Asobo is confident of their release candidate, then Asobo can open it up to the entire MSFS player base to beta test via an "opt in" beta test phase.  

It doesn't have to be 300 beta testers vs entire public "opt in" beta testers. Asobo can utilize both.