Guild Wars 2

Why ArenaNet does not fix a oldest bugs, they are known about it (described on the wiki), but they to ignore? Trait on mesmer mantra, that provide stacks, a lot of time is does not work, and is not repaired, and this bug destroy the mantra build.

p.s. sorry for my google translate.

Dont forget the NPCs in ascalon catacombs which still bug all the time.

I’m glad they finally fixed the bugged falling damage one

aspirine.6852:

I’m glad they finally fixed the bugged falling damage one

Idk, that one had its funny moments. Like the time a guildie jumped off a rock and died. He was lying there saying, WTF! I was laughing while I revived him.

Simply, in the big scheme of things in terms of prioritized bug fixes and content additions include an expansion, it’s just not a high enough priority to assume their limited manpower to fix it.

There is no software company that will ever have the resources to fix every bug or annoyance in their products. As Behellagh says, this means they have to prioritize. The usual practice is to look at

• scope (how many affected),
• severity (how much is someone affected),
• difficulty (how easy is it to figure out what’s wrong and fix it),
• opportunity (can this be fixed with other changes or fixes),
• importance (how much does it matter in the grand scheme of things),
• interoperability (how much does adjusting this affect other things), and
• luck (was it noticed sooner or later, was it described well, was there sufficient data to troubleshoot, is there a test environment set up suitable for replicating/confirming fixes, …)

It’s a lot like fixing potholes: everyone wants their town to fix the ones in front of their own house, but the city has to choose which to fix first. Then, before they fix the next set, there will be new ones appearing. As a result, pretty much most people are annoyed by potholes at some point, even if the city does a great job of fixing them.

edit: missed a line-break

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

There is no software company that will ever have the resources to fix every bug or annoyance in their products. As Behellagh says, this means they have to prioritize. The usual practice is to look at

• scope (how many affected),
• severity (how much is someone affected),
• difficulty (how easy is it to figure out what’s wrong and fix it),
• opportunity (can this be fixed with other changes or fixes), importance (how much does it matter in the grand scheme of things),
• interoperability (how much does adjusting this affect other things), and
• luck (was it noticed sooner or later, was it described well, was there sufficient data to troubleshoot, is there a test environment set up suitable for replicating/confirming fixes, …)

It’s a lot like fixing potholes: everyone wants their town to fix the ones in front of their own house, but the city has to choose which to fix first. Then, before they fix the next set, there will be new ones appearing. As a result, pretty much most people are annoyed by potholes at some point, even if the city does a great job of fixing them.

This is a great post and it’s what I’ve tried to say many times. You have a list of things to do and you have but so much time and energy to do it. The stuff you can’t get to gets put off.

When I wrote, I had a list of things to write as long as my arm. I didn’t get to finish 80% of them. I’d have liked to, but I didn’t have the time or energy. It doesn’t mean I didn’t want to or mean to. I just never got to them, because there was always some job that actually made me money that had to be done first.

Vayne.8563:

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

There is no software company that will ever have the resources to fix every bug or annoyance in their products. As Behellagh says, this means they have to prioritize. The usual practice is to look at

• scope (how many affected),
• severity (how much is someone affected),
• difficulty (how easy is it to figure out what’s wrong and fix it),
• opportunity (can this be fixed with other changes or fixes), importance (how much does it matter in the grand scheme of things),
• interoperability (how much does adjusting this affect other things), and
• luck (was it noticed sooner or later, was it described well, was there sufficient data to troubleshoot, is there a test environment set up suitable for replicating/confirming fixes, …)

It’s a lot like fixing potholes: everyone wants their town to fix the ones in front of their own house, but the city has to choose which to fix first. Then, before they fix the next set, there will be new ones appearing. As a result, pretty much most people are annoyed by potholes at some point, even if the city does a great job of fixing them.

This is a great post and it’s what I’ve tried to say many times. You have a list of things to do and you have but so much time and energy to do it. The stuff you can’t get to gets put off.

When I wrote, I had a list of things to write as long as my arm. I didn’t get to finish 80% of them. I’d have liked to, but I didn’t have the time or energy. It doesn’t mean I didn’t want to or mean to. I just never got to them, because there was always some job that actually made me money that had to be done first.

Yeah, unfortunately that how things work. Not doing something doesn’t mean not wanting to do, just there haven’t been chances or resources to do such thing.