Deflect more, it makes you look like what you are.
It's not defection at all. Anyone with any modicum of sense can read between the lines and understand what I am saying. Truthfully your posts seems more like hallow attempts at flame baiting rather than substantive talking points about the topic.
The posts I have seen so far reek more of someone making their way through college as a software developer and gone through an internship or two but hasn't fully been introduced to the development life cycle first hand to experience all the inefficiencies involved in the process. The only thing I see is someone spouting off college level ideals about Utopian coding situations where all your code sits perfectly in frameworks, perfectly adhering to standards, no zero spaghetti code, perfectly optimized and no inefficiencies.
There are a million reasons as to why I can think of as to why it is perfectly fine that the patch would be taking this long, but I can't sit back and think of any reason to say why a patch should be done in X amount of time without being able to look under the hood at many variables.
Saying someone should be developing every piece of code now that they would need for the next ten years is beyond ignorant. There is no human on the planet that would be able to sit back and predict where a project is going to go due to bosses changing their minds on the direction of projects, clients changing their minds with what they want every time they see the project.
What saddens me is that this thread seems to have a lot of people assuming there is one "golden" or true way to code and it is the only way. Even worse that people think testing means just making sure the game plays and is beatable. There's so much more, a tester's job is to break stuff, not just do the "standard" stuff. You go out, you try something unorthodox in order to get it to break. If they just played the game normally they could miss many bugs.
Let's also look at why PTRs exist and why there is so much testing. What happens if you have a pool of 100 testers and the game breaks for just one of them? By some of the posts I've seen here, many of you would say that's fine. Okay, now let's take that number up to live and assume 1 million are playing now. That is a multiplaction of x10,000. That means that now 10,000 people can't play because something was broken. It's a small percentage, sure, but when you apply a real number to it, you can see why they wouldn't want to let that happen.
Sometimes bugs don't occur untill after several attempts or sometimes they occur once and never again. It's the nature of the beast for them to be cautious, especially when ANY minor change to a program this huge could somehow break something else. And make no mistake, this is no small change. Monster spawn locations have to be added and then you have to make sure they work like they're supposed to especially with the randomization system. This isn't like some Tabletop RPG when you can just say "oh I'll throw in another orc here".
There's so many assumptions going on here and bickering that I almost didn't even want to say anything, but so many people who have never even tried programming make too many assumptions and I feel like the misinformation has to stop. Even more troubling is a self proclaimed programmer coming in and saying it's no big deal. I don't even fathom that one, maybe you're lucky and you happen to have a really good team that has software that's exceptionally portable and modular, but don't assume everything that you do in your code is easily carried over to a game engine. We don't know how it's programmed, how easy or hard it is.
I'm more inclined to believe the gentleman who came in and talked about meetings on top of meetings.. coding changes and revisions taking forever due to QA and testing and even more revisions and meetings, etc onto oblivion. Why do I believe that? Because buracracy. Blizzard isn't an agile team. They do their best to make sure all their changes work and even that isn't always enough. They're always talking about what they want to do and how they tackle problems. Just look at all the ideas they throw out that never make it. They've probably thrown out more ideas than many of us could think of.
Make no mistake, this by no means should indicate that I believe Blizzard has all the right answers. They've proven that to be false many times. But I really hate to see people call their development team lazy because they feel patches aren't comming out fast enough. Considering how much they have to go through to get a patch approved for release, we've actually seen a lot of changes and updates over the course of the last year.
^ thanks for saving me some time writing that, KK.
The answer to the thread title is "no". There you have it. Simple as that.
After dozens of comments by others explaining in detail why things are the way they are, and mostly provocative replies to these I think we all had enough. Indeed doesn't really look like a discussion (at least not for a couple pages), and has strong characteristics of textbook trolling.