BuzzerBeater Forums

I think the number of rebounds going out is also relative to how good the rebounding of either team is, atleast I think it should be.

I teach at a middle school and work with kids. Needless to say when they suck at rebounding (and well are just kids so really raw at just about everything) lots of rebounds go out, even after FTs.

On the GE....

I been experimenting with the now live new tactics.... phenomenal JS and strong JR is not enough to shoot on bots... but mediocre JS and inept JR is MORE than enough....?!?!? I had the same ?!??! feeling last year when my atrocious rebounder outrebounds just about everybody but sensational, not so sensational.....

I never report or document any of this stuff though because I am lazy.

I think the key with issues you see in the game engine is getting diligent and keeping some logs and report really well what you are seeing to the BBs through the appropriate channels. Just complaining is unlikely, I feel, to help the issue. I blame more my own laziness for teh persistance of bugs that might bother me.

and stuff

You would think it would be based on that, but I haven't read anywhere where the BB's suggested skill would be involved in whether a rebound goes out of bounds. Instead, I think it's just a random event added in there to spice up the play by play. Unfortunately, randomness can have extreme effects. Some poster on this thread claimed to have seen the out of bounds play happen a dozen times and he was right. I looked at his game and it happened 11 times (and I think it was off his player each time). Then you take a look at my first league game, for instance, and it only happened 5 times.
For what it's worth, I think it's a neat little feature that adds a little bit of realism. It's not perfect. I'd like to see it be based on skill as well. But it's neat, nonetheless.

Handling was already of influence on rebounding. I'm quite sure. Whatever my PF goes he seems to have the most rebounds. He has got 9 HN and 16 RB, whilst his opponnents in the league have about the same amount of RB, he has more RBs in a season.

If it's random, this rebounding thing should be changed.

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/30414245/boxscore.aspx
its allmost same , but i won o.O that's sooo strange because i was losing all game long ...

How about this one in my game last night...
My player hits a three and then comes back down and dunks the ball....then the thing says," Player A(my player) can't buy a bucket"...now that is stupid..he had just hit two shots in a row. I love watching the games but might find something better to do with my time and become just a boxscore watcher. If the GE is so messed up that you don't know who has the ball, who is Defending who( last night my player went for a layup being defended by himself) WTF. This isn't complaining it is demanding a better product for my money. My supporter is up on March 9th. If you want my money, you got to fix some of these probelms( I don't mean the 5th place or the BB3 non problems you seem to have fixed). And by looking at the user count and how it has gone down as of late it seems like I'm not the only one.

they need to fix attendence before they fix anything else

In watching a few games and analyzing my stats afterward, those times that things like that occurred were simply presentational errors. The actual points scored, turnovers and rebounds were all correct. If you want to be angry about a bunch of low level text bugs with text displaying where it shouldn't, that's fine. However, nothing I have seen so far has indicated that the actual GE is at fault here.

Having spent a couple years in game development QA, I can say that low level text bugs are *usually* so low on the fix list that you had better get used to them. They don't influence the outcome, they don't change gameplay. Sure, they can and should be fixed. They're just not as important as say, the server getting unreasonable load at certain times of the day that actually effect site and game functionality. When you have to apportion your bug fixing due to manpower limitations, presentation suffers.

I personally would much rather some easily ignorable text issues than 15 minute delays around prime time EU time. Your mileage may vary of course.

I think the text bugs are a huge letdown here and are not just a low level fix. This is mainly because the game engine one of the core features of this game and not just a display bug on an random page that not many people access.

Beyond all that, I am quite surprised they actually made it into the live game engine with so many bugs. As you've worked in QA, you should know that these bugs are fine for your testing environment but should not be rolled out into a live system with all the bugs still existent. Heck thats what you guys are pretty much being paid for.

My belief is that it is fine having bugs as every application will have it but my main biff here is that these bugs were discovered in the testing phase and yet was not addressed as they decided to roll out the final product with all the bugs still inherent in the program.

I think the text bugs are a huge letdown here and are not just a low level fix. This is mainly because the game engine one of the core features of this game and not just a display bug on an random page that not many people access.

You seem to have crossed issues here though. The GE isn't broken (or at least, not in the specific instances you've put forward from the information I've looked at.) The Game Viewer has some issues that are completely based on presentation and have no effect on the overall game flow. Player A earning a Double Double 10 times and defending himself 6 trillion times in a game according to the GV makes zero difference in the long run when in the end those things never really happened in the GE and thus have no effect on the game. They're simply text display issues. Should they be fixed? Yes. Does it effect gameplay? No. In the world of game development with minimal developer manpower, gameplay fixes trump text fixes most of the time. From what I've seen, the BBs have been busy squashing the former.

As you've worked in QA, you should know that these bugs are fine for your testing environment but should not be rolled out into a live system with all the bugs still existent. Heck thats what you guys are pretty much being paid for.

Actually, QA's job isn't (usually) to make sure that bugs aren't rolled out into the system. QA is there to point out every single little issue with the software. The producer on the project then makes the call as to whether it should be fixed or not. The first thing you learn (or should learn) in QA is that every single shipped game that has ever come out has bugs, as you stated. It's an inescapable fact of software development. Given that, you report everything so that it can be fixed.

However, games have to ship eventually and at some point the producer will have to batten down the hatches and just ship the software. At that point it's QA's job to re-point out anything incredibly game breaking that HAS to be fixed otherwise the game will flop. If you're not willing to die on the mountain for a given bug, you let it go. That's where text bugs like these hang around. The Game Viewer updates with the color commentary works. There are issues with false commentary such as "couldn't buy a bucket" after 2 scores. Whoever is in charge of letting things go live looked at the number of bugs for the Game Viewer versus their development time opportunity cost to fix the remaining bugs and said "ship it!" so that people could get the improvements. Despite the bugs. The same way any boxed game goes to the shelves. There is not a single game I've worked on that didn't ship with dozens of issues closed out as "not enough time" or "Too costly, please close"

The great thing about a web based game, unlike the boxed product I've worked on is that this stuff can be fixed. The bugs are most definitely in BB's queue as they've commented on them. I personally can't see how anyone could get so up in arms about minor issues that have zero effect on gameplay when they are aware that the devs will address it when they can.

Here here.

I will say that the can't buy a bucket after a guy hits three shots in a row is annoying. But last night all double double references were correct (There were two). so that's an improvement.

Let's see....I paid for supporter so I can watch an extra game a week. Not just look at the boxscore the next day. Seeing who is passing to who and who defends who and how this/that player plays in this /that offense and defense is huge. Saying all the bugs are low on the list is a joke. If it makes people not want to watch their games, it will make them not spend their money on something so vital as the GE or match veiwer being junk. Why would I pay $39 on a logo and banner and bookmarking players. Thats like worth $2.50. It seems like my money is going into the BB beer fund instead of actual work on improving the game. There hasn't been an improvement in 5 season and the declining user total should worry someone at BB.