Originally Posted by
Niminae
It's hard for me to comprehend how you got "lash out" and "rant" out of my post. Maybe you could point to specific words or phrases I used?
And as for "the idiocy of "Well just fix the DB!"" Well, I didn't say that, so I'd really appreciate you not using quotes as if I did.
This is also a thing that simply did not happen.
My post that has caused so much consternation was short, so I'll repeat it here for your convenience:
I have a lot of experience in a lot of different environments by virtue of having been a contractor for the majority of my professional career. I have seen videos with Steelstar in them and so I have a decent idea of his age. I guarantee that I have worked in and become intimately familiar with the workings of many more professional environments than he has, by at least an order of magnitude, simply by virtue of his age and mine. So I'm pretty sure I have a much greater breadth of understanding of how things work in general than he does. Of course anyone who is actually working in the environment beats me hands down on knowledge of it, and I am not challenging either Lynnabel of Steelstar over that, but I'd be surprised if he didn't have a rather tunnel vision perspective on it. I have seen that many times across the years. In any event, assuming that no one else could possibly have a suggestion for improvement which has any value is the height of hubris.
I cannot count the number of times I was on a contract making money for my employer because some company or another went the route of "It's too hard to do this right," or "It'll take to long to do this right," and so they decided to just throw down a quick kludge that kept things running. Again. And again. And again. The problem with this approach is that after a while of the same practice being employed it becomes almost impossible to "do this right" even with minor issues that could be "done right," because they also have to be laid down on top of all the prior kludges. And in some cases issues simply cannot be resolved due to the presence of those kludges. It just becomes impossible to do certain things because of "spaghetti code." I wonder how many times we've been told that something couldn't be done due to "tech limitations" it actually was due to kludge limitations that were introduced years before?
Oftentimes there is no way to move forward with a needed fix without a complete re-install and then applying those more difficult and more lengthy interim fixes anyway, just done right this time. And that's when the company will hire my company to come in and rescue them. At a much greater cost and with potential disruptions to both customer facing and employee facing systems. And in some cases there was just no practical way to salvage the mess they had made, and instead the solution is to bring in a new product entirely. Which they of course have to purchase. And then data migration can become one of the most challenging parts of the change. So you'll get no argument from me about data migration being a challenge. But that is with a data base with tens or hundreds of thousands of records. Not ~1,000 records. ~1,000 records could be migrated almost by hand from whatever "non-traditional database" they are in to an actual database which would have a huge performance advantage over the obviously lag-inducing method which is in place today.
The game uses data bases, right?
Oh, that's what you think happened?
Here's what I saw:
I post a suggestion about doing things right rather than fast, and provide three examples;
Lynnabel says it's not always possible because of "non-traditional data base";
I say then why not use a traditional data base, because that's what they are good at;
Kylstrem decides to white knight with a post that added nothing to the discussion;
Steelstar +1'ed him.
I don't feel put in my place, or hurt, or upset. But if that what you want to think happened then that's fine by me.
What I do feel is mostly resigned. I had hoped that SSG would be a new beginning and that a lot of the issues Turbine had would be left behind. I do not believe that to be the case, and I know I am not alone in this perception based on conversations I have had with the vast majority of the people I run with. The company name changed, but the attitudes and approaches of the people did not. And in the end it is people who make the environment, not names or slogans or promises of great things to come.