Elemental Multiplayer Patch Delayed Until Next Week

By Brian Leahy, Sep 10, 2010 3:40pm PDT

The patch that was to enable multiplayer along with other gameplay fixes for Stardock's Elemental: War of Magic has been delayed until next week. It had been scheduled to release today, but wasn't ready.

In a post titled, "Making use of a lesson learned," no doubt referring to the game's shaky launch, Stardock CEO Brad Wardell explains the slight delay:

The bad news is that we're going to have to delay v1.08 for a few days. The internal QA deadline for the test build was this morning and unfortunately it needed a few more hours before being submitted. Rather than even remotely risk something that is going to cause pain (for our players and us) I'm just pushing it until the next QA slot which is next Tuesday.

The good news is that there will be "substantially more game play improvements in v1.08 than originally intended" as the extra time will give the team time to incorporate "spell changes, tactical battle tweaks and such."

It's good to hear that Brad and Stardock are opting to take a bit more time with a release than previous patches to make sure that the QA process happens in full.

Click here to comment...


See All Comments | 5 Threads | 19 Comments
  • just so im clear on what is happening here... the patch was unable to complete QA by the deadline, so it was pushed back. and in that intervening time, they are going to introduce more new features, that will require yet more QA... right?

    ive been a software developer for the last 20 years of my career (not games, much more mundane and boring stuff) and in my experience, the way to meet QA cycles is not to keep cramming more changes in to a release that is already proving to require more QA than originally planned. that is generally a recipe for disaster by making it even MORE difficult to QA because now you dont know if the bugs you find are a result of the first batch of changes that didnt finish QA, or the NEW batch of changes that havent even begun QA, or some weird synergistic effect of BOTH... bugs that will now require even more changes to both sets of original changes, requiring more QA, repeat ad nauseum.

    if a batch of updates misses a QA cycle, the message should be "this is good because it will allow us to be EXTRA sure the changes are solid during the additional QA cycle, leading to a more stable release" and not "this is good because now we can add even MORE stuff that will need testing to an already difficult-to-test set of changes."

    at least, thats how it seems to me...

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 4 replies.