Question / Suggestion for the Devs.

[Mytheos]

Is it possible to revert back to a previous Beta Build?

I assume the answer is no.

I could try to just back up my game files for each build but I think that could end up being overcomplicated due to steam, and could introduce errors, which is not great for beta feedback.

I also doubt most players have the technical expertise to do this successfully.

It seemed like 19-1 was mostly unplayable, 19-2 was very playable, and 19-3 is mostly unplayable.

---------

Would it be possible to start a Poll for each build asking the testers how stable it was, and if found to be mostly unplayable roll back the steam version?

---------

I dont know what the future brings or how you do things, but if we ended up with back to back unplayable builds it could be difficult to determine if a bug was fixed in the previous build or introduced in the following build. (Again I dont know your process so maybe this isnt a possibility)

Another issue being people may decide to take a break and play another game for awhile, reducing your pool of testers and feedback if the worst case scenario happened and we had several unplayable builds in a row.

I think a trend may arise as well where people sit back, read the forums and wait to find out if the newest beta build is stable enough to play before they update.

Which leads to the problem of less people testing, and people that wait to determine if is playable based on initial feedback wont be making it as far into the game, and thereby the amount of feedback on end and mid game will be greatly reduced.

[RawCode]

you were warned about exp builds, they for testing, not for playing.

[Mytheos]

you were warned about exp builds, they for testing, not for playing.

I am fully aware it is a beta build, that isnt the point of the thread.

You cant test a build that you cant play. Not sure why that is a point of confusion.

[Aaron]

You can't roll back to earlier experimental builds no, but you can roll back to the original steam version by opting back out of the experimental branch on Steam. We will, very periodically, update that main steam version, but don't expect that soon.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Aaron

[Mytheos]

Well again, my problem isnt "I cant play the game"

My thought was just that no one can test certain builds as well as I would assume you would like. So at least we would be able to put more testing into older beta builds and provide continued feedback on that.

Over on the 19-3 board someone just asked how was 19-3 and I mentioned it seemed a bit unplayable so I think people are just waiting on 19-4.

Thotkins has listed his experiences so far and he really pushed to test 19-3 but he ended up having to avoid several things, such as 3 fighter wings as the game would CTD every time...and that makes it hard to test and provide feedback on 19-3's major update which was immortal interceptors if you have to avoid parts of Air Combat.

[Mytheos]

And today after I posted this there were several comments talking about 19-3 being too unstable to test properly.

So please dont think I am complaining about the builds being unstable, thats part of the process and I understand that.

But I just figured experimental builds are there to provide the developers with feedback, which cant happen properly on an unstable build, and this might cause a cycle of people being too gunshy about updating to a beta build...until the initial feedback is given on stability, thereby reducing the number of beta testers and the length of time they choose to spend on each build.

And you guys have done a great job on getting updates out fast, and if people play right away you'll get better feedback per update.

Vs them waiting for half the build cycle before testing or just skipping it altogether.

[StellarRat]

But I just figured experimental builds are there to provide the developers with feedback, which cant happen properly on an unstable build

Actually, I think the best way to look at the experimental builds, is as an opportunity to look at UI changes, new mechanics, and report bugs to Goldhawk. In my mind, they really aren't for any kind of serious balancing or playtesting. What you're seeing is what us programmer types would be working on before we have any users attempt to do "real" work with the software.

[Mytheos]

I agree that for UIs and easy to look at things that is true.

But there is no way for us to provide much feedback on the effect of something as complex as Immortal Interceptors without getting past the first month...which it seemed like that and TUs were the main points.

And TUs on grenades were a bit hard to judge using only straight rookies for a couple of missions.

Depending on how they played out over a few months might even have people changing their builds and trying new ones...but again they cant get that far if the build isnt somewhat stable.

Again not bitching about builds being unstable, part of it and I understand fully, nothing against the devs, just part of the process.

Just trying to share a couple thoughts that could increase the amount, speed up, and increase the quality of beta feedback.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Mytheos

[Mytheos]

Please let me know however, if I am looking at this the wrong way.

If the experimental builds are PRIMARILY for players to just see and take a look at what the devs are tinkering with then feel free to delete my post.

If they are used to get player feedback, then I think my suggestions are valid.

[ThunderGr]

As I have said on another thread, the devs could allow for a rollback if they uploaded each build as a different beta. The players would, then, be able to choose to which experimental build to opt in.

[jazzglands]

Why would they want feedback about balance changes on an old build?

Also, I went until the end of october before I got my first game crash. Your mileage may vary of course, but I think you should just stick with it.

[Mytheos]

Why would they want feedback about balance changes on an old build?

Also, I went until the end of october before I got my first game crash. Your mileage may vary of course, but I think you should just stick with it.

If you check the updates from the different builds you'll notice they tend to come out rather quickly.

The longer a build is out, the further more people will get, you need to of course have the beginning, middle and end of the game all balanced.

And instead of many testers sitting idle while they wait for the next, more stable build to come out, it allows us to provide continued feedback on a build that is more able to be played and tested.

In my OP I mentioned a few other points as well, such as the worst case situation of having a couple of problematic builds back to back and the problems that could potentially arise.

Again as I said before we've had 3 builds so far, and 2 of the 3 were hard to test due to various CTD bugs.

[RawCode]

your feedback on outdated beta wont have any value, i just can't see any reason to play "old" beta.

I think people are just waiting on 19-4.

you really shoud not "think" for other people, your opinion is only your opinion.

Edited July 11, 2013 by RawCode

[Mytheos]

your feedback on outdated beta wont have any value, i just can't see any reason to play "old" beta.

you really shoud not "think" for other people, your opinion is only your opinion.

Do you want me to quote 5 different people saying the same thing?

Each build is another layer on top of an old layer. Do you somehow think every bug in 19-2 is fixed in 19-3?

You know if you dont like me because I disagreed with you in a constructive way in other threads, thats fine.

But do you really feel the need to forum stalk me and comment negatively on everything I say?

Edited July 11, 2013 by Mytheos

[Aaron]

Guys chill out.

This build is definitely too crash-filled to be much use, I know, but I would rather spend time fixing those crashes and getting a new build out than farting about reverting to older builds; the experimental branch is sometimes going to be crashy, particularly when there are Geoscape changes because the code there is so fragile.

You guys do a great job at working around all these problems and giving us very useful feedback regardless (and I cannot emphasise enough how helpful you guys are), but if we drop a bum build like this one then please don't bash your head against it to the point of utter frustration! We will get a new one out to fix the issues as soon as we can. The limiting factor right now is just programmer time - one of the crashes is already fixed, a second is in the process of being fixed and a third (the one to do with crashes after a base defence mission) is proving hard to repro - that's what I'll be trying to do today.

[Mytheos]

I have no idea how hard it is to have two different experimental builds available at the same time, which is essentially my question/suggestion.

I dont think you should drop a new build because it's buggy, it still gives us the ability to give feedback on several of the patched items, like UI changes, inventory screens, grenade TUs and so forth. Its still valuable.

But I was just thinking there is still value in testing an older build as well.

I just had it in my mind, the longer something was beta tested, the more bugs could be found, and the more feedback could be given...of course this only goes so far, as the older a build is, the less value the testing is.

So I thought it might be a good idea to consider certain experimental builds as a Last Known Good (Such as 19-2).

And keep them until replaced by a newer build that is felt to be reasonably stable.

So you'd have 19-2 Last Known Good and 19-3 Brand New available at the same time.

And if 19-4 wasnt reasonably stable and had everything 19-3 had, then you'd just have 19-2 and 19-4.

If 19-5 was reasonably stable, then you'd have 19-5 replace 19-2 as the Last Known Good and so on.

I'm sorry if I'm not being clear, I'm trying my best to articulate my ideas and thoughts.

Edited July 11, 2013 by Mytheos

[ThunderGr]

I have no idea how hard it is to have two different experimental builds available at the same time, which is essentially my question/suggestion.

I dont think you should drop a new build because it's buggy, it still gives us the ability to give feedback on several of the patched items, like UI changes, inventory screens, grenade TUs and so forth. Its still valuable.

But I was just thinking there is still value in testing an older build as well.

I just had it in my mind, the longer something was beta tested, the more bugs could be found, and the more feedback could be given...of course this only goes so far, as the older a build is, the less value the testing is.

So I thought it might be a good idea to consider certain experimental builds as a Last Known Good (Such as 19-2).

And keep them until replaced by a newer build that is felt to be reasonably stable.

Hmmm, from a development point of view, beta-testing previous builds is useless. Since the experimental builds are here for us to help with the development, I understand that it is undesirable to have multiple such builds. The issue is not for the players to be able and play the game from start to end, it is to be tested and provide feedback that would help with the development and the debugging. This way the devs avoid hiring beta-testers that would cost them dearly and would increase the cost of the end-product, as well.

The existence of the "stable" v18 build is there for those that want to play the game from start to end and is completely useless to the developers as far as feedback is concerned.

So, while I understand that your suggestion was made as a pacifying solution for those that go about crying on how unplayable is x build of the experimental, expecting to have a playable build but, in the end, noone is forced to play the experimental. They only play it to help with the development. If they cannot understand that, I cannot see why the developers have to waste the time they gain from putting up the experimental builds in useless maintenance intensive chores like maintaining multiple builds of the experimental and having to deal with obsolete/indifferent/useless feedback about previous builds in the forums.