Call me crazy but I consider QA and dev work to be one in the same, but then again that's exactly what I'm doing with my own work. I'm having a rant yes, but I don't know why more people don't think like this with regards to QA generally. If you don't test your code properly, you're a shit coder. I know quite a bit about the GTA loading bug because I was genuinely interested in it and it also meant I could laugh at Rockstar. The whole thing happened because some utter twat copy-pasted a for loop and nobody double checked anything. A classic example of a lazy attitude and them going "Hurr finished now, doesn't matter".
Professional rant over lol, other programmers will know what I'm talking about but you can see how people are thinking through their code and it pisses me off. The point is this guy solved a major bug and I consider $10,000 to be a bit of an insult given the scale of the problem and it clearly was overlooked for years so if the fuckers at rockstar are too lazy to do it themselves they should be paying someone who isn't full time.
In case you couldn't tell this sort of thing really, really annoys me, people don't appreciate how important solid QA is.
Please tell how the developers of the unreal engine is thinking. I have not developed the skill to understand thought from code yet.
The point is this guy solved a major bug and I consider $10,000 to be a bit of an insult given the scale of the problem and it clearly was overlooked for years
So a major bug, that the product could live with for years and still be functional (I know functional is always weirdly requirement especially with modern games)? How much should a corporation pay for such a bug fix? a years salary?
What incentive structure would you entail that would not make it profitable to create bugs?
Once more, did the devs force the bug hunter to hand over his code?
Aka, did they made an offer he can't refuse?
Do you have the source for the source code pre fix? I would like to read this in its entire context.
lol now I think you're just being a major pedant, I haven't thought that far ahead with my post I just think $10,000 is peanuts in the grand scheme of things. You have to look at it in the context of the scale that programmers work with, these are not low level paper pushers and they often deal with stuff that affects the entire infrastructure of a company and affect millions of customers. If you don't believe me just ask anyone who works in these fields.
It's also worth bearing in mind this guy didn't even have access to the original source code and project, he did it all looking at the program itself which is insane.
Edit: Correction, might not have been a copy-pasted for loop though maybe that was some other bug somebody uncovered, rockstar don't write their code very well.
lol now I think you're just being a major pedant, I haven't thought that far ahead with my post I just think $10,000 is peanuts in the grand scheme of things.
That is fair in regards to me asking for the unreal devs thoughts, the problem is that you do not seem to think at all in regards to this. It is an emotional argument and not a logical one. Which is why I'm not following it.
You have to look at it in the context of the scale that programmers work with, these are not low level paper pushers and they often deal with stuff that affects the entire infrastructure of a company and affect millions of customers. If you don't believe me just ask anyone who works in these field.
Many on this forum work in these fields or at least claim to....
But once more is the question how do you determine the value?
it's not an emotional argument, when it comes to judging programming work value it's tricky, partly because it's such a new industry to begin with. I do think it's an issue of knowing how much you're worth. Again though, I think it's fair to make the argument for more money depending on the scale of what you're working on but that's just me.
You see this problem when it comes to 3D artists, I've browsed freelancer jobs and even when it comes to the issue of how much artists get paid for based on the scale of the project and how long that would take the pay discrepancy is remarkable. A lot of the people who are putting up the job postings obviously don't even know anything about the work based on what they write and simply spam tags hoping they'll get lucky. I think the issue of how much do you pay real tech employees who do actual work is a whole other topic we can go into for a long amount of time.
Call me crazy but I consider QA and dev work to be one in the same
Devs can do some QA in the same way that devs can do some UI design but QA is a completely separate skillset. They are not the same job.
Good QA people are some of the best people to have on your team. Fortunately bad QA people are mostly just useless so they aren't an active detriment to productivity.
Call me crazy but I consider QA and dev work to be one in the same, but then again that's exactly what I'm doing with my own work. I'm having a rant yes, but I don't know why more people don't think like this with regards to QA generally. If you don't test your code properly, you're a shit coder. I know quite a bit about the GTA loading bug because I was genuinely interested in it and it also meant I could laugh at Rockstar. The whole thing happened because some utter twat copy-pasted a for loop and nobody double checked anything. A classic example of a lazy attitude and them going "Hurr finished now, doesn't matter".
Professional rant over lol, other programmers will know what I'm talking about but you can see how people are thinking through their code and it pisses me off. The point is this guy solved a major bug and I consider $10,000 to be a bit of an insult given the scale of the problem and it clearly was overlooked for years so if the fuckers at rockstar are too lazy to do it themselves they should be paying someone who isn't full time.
In case you couldn't tell this sort of thing really, really annoys me, people don't appreciate how important solid QA is.
Please tell how the developers of the unreal engine is thinking. I have not developed the skill to understand thought from code yet.
So a major bug, that the product could live with for years and still be functional (I know functional is always weirdly requirement especially with modern games)? How much should a corporation pay for such a bug fix? a years salary? What incentive structure would you entail that would not make it profitable to create bugs?
Once more, did the devs force the bug hunter to hand over his code? Aka, did they made an offer he can't refuse?
Do you have the source for the source code pre fix? I would like to read this in its entire context.
lol now I think you're just being a major pedant, I haven't thought that far ahead with my post I just think $10,000 is peanuts in the grand scheme of things. You have to look at it in the context of the scale that programmers work with, these are not low level paper pushers and they often deal with stuff that affects the entire infrastructure of a company and affect millions of customers. If you don't believe me just ask anyone who works in these fields.
https://nee.lv/2021/02/28/How-I-cut-GTA-Online-loading-times-by-70/
It's also worth bearing in mind this guy didn't even have access to the original source code and project, he did it all looking at the program itself which is insane.
Edit: Correction, might not have been a copy-pasted for loop though maybe that was some other bug somebody uncovered, rockstar don't write their code very well.
That is fair in regards to me asking for the unreal devs thoughts, the problem is that you do not seem to think at all in regards to this. It is an emotional argument and not a logical one. Which is why I'm not following it.
Many on this forum work in these fields or at least claim to.... But once more is the question how do you determine the value?
Thanks for the link, tips and tricks on reverse engineering is always a fun read. Even if I rarely get the time to use them later.
it's not an emotional argument, when it comes to judging programming work value it's tricky, partly because it's such a new industry to begin with. I do think it's an issue of knowing how much you're worth. Again though, I think it's fair to make the argument for more money depending on the scale of what you're working on but that's just me.
You see this problem when it comes to 3D artists, I've browsed freelancer jobs and even when it comes to the issue of how much artists get paid for based on the scale of the project and how long that would take the pay discrepancy is remarkable. A lot of the people who are putting up the job postings obviously don't even know anything about the work based on what they write and simply spam tags hoping they'll get lucky. I think the issue of how much do you pay real tech employees who do actual work is a whole other topic we can go into for a long amount of time.
Devs can do some QA in the same way that devs can do some UI design but QA is a completely separate skillset. They are not the same job.
Good QA people are some of the best people to have on your team. Fortunately bad QA people are mostly just useless so they aren't an active detriment to productivity.