The point in "re-testing"

[Iroquois]

I have some concerns with creator. I noticed that if you go back and modify a created race for example, if you change any physical features you must have to test the track again. Now, the point in to test a created race initially is so that you can validate that there is nothing wrong with the checkpoint placement( orientation/impedance) and the exact same for props.

 

Therefore, if you come back to re-validate your test after making some changes, why should we have to redo it if we removed props? I mean it would make sense to retest it after removing checkpoints because you may or may not like their position on the map relative to other checkpoints or roads/props but for the removal of props?

 

If you add props, you should be worried in case if it obstructs something or is invalid, etc. If you remove that piece, whether it was obstructing something or not, it would not have a negative outcome on the race.

 

Anyone else annoyed by this? I really despise removing an unfortunate, useless and/or impeding prop piece and then having to re-authenticate a race by lapping it again, especially if its more than 10 minutes long.

 

Anyone else agree? Anyone like to share their opinion on this?

 

 

 

 

[Flukey]

I don't think you should be annoyed at testing your own track over and over. If you don't enjoy it why should anyone else want to play it repeatedly?

[GTAMYBABIES]

I don't think you should be annoyed at testing your own track over and over. If you don't enjoy it why should anyone else want to play it repeatedly?

I agree. I find sometimes if I don't play a race I made for a while and come back to it later I find problems I didn't see before and can fix them. That's why I retest. Plus the system they have for validating your own test is flawed as you could use a small vehicle to test it and then change the vehicle to a big one that can't get to the checkpoints that's one thing I see wrong with it currently. But if you play tracks others have recommended it is usually better.

 

@op I don't have the issue you have.

Edited May 24, 2014 by GTAMYBABIES

[Flukey]

The test is flawed. I've recently had to publish stuff that was unfinished just to properly test something. For example testing a GTA race on creator doesn't let you exit your vehicle.

 

I know where op is coming from in a way though, but anything I have tested to the extent it bores me has been deleted before publication.

[Iroquois]

 

I don't think you should be annoyed at testing your own track over and over. If you don't enjoy it why should anyone else want to play it repeatedly?

I agree. I find sometimes if I don't play a race I made for a while and come back to it later I find problems I didn't see before and can fix them. That's why I retest. Plus the system they have for validating your own test is flawed as you could use a small vehicle to test it and then change the vehicle to a big one that can't get to the checkpoints that's one thing I see wrong with it currently. But if you play tracks others have recommended it is usually better.

 

@op I don't have the issue you have.

 

No I understand that, its just when I create a race, I lap it many times, I then do some tweaks, then test it again. Then I do those races with friends, I then notice problems with the race again and I go back to creator to revalidate it, no problem. What i meant by my post, is way far down the line. Like weeks and months later. Small teeny tiny features that must be removed. After weeks or months after creating the race, I usually find small errors or horrible obstacles that needs to be fixed; these errors or problems are not serious but it could be adjusted.

 

Something that would need a quick tweak. In that case, I would just like to go back to them, remove it and republish it. Re-testing or relapping it 100 times during the testing/tweaking period is fine and understandable. But to do another 100's of laps on a week-old or month old track? It can get tiringly quickly, just to retest it just to see a difference in that small fraction of the track.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Iroquois

[GTAMYBABIES]

The test is flawed. I've recently had to publish stuff that was unfinished just to properly test something. For example testing a GTA race on creator doesn't let you exit your vehicle.

 

I know where op is coming from in a way though, but anything I have tested to the extent it bores me has been deleted before publication.

Plus the physics in the creator mode are different from the test mode and the test mode physics are different from racing physics and racing physics are different from free roam. It's an odd universe out there. Sometimes I like the creator physics as you can sit on a motorcycle on a stand still and do flips as you can hardly ever crash in a motorcycle in that mode. Edited May 24, 2014 by GTAMYBABIES

[Flukey]

@ op

 

Lol

 

Just do one lap and you're good.

 

 

The test is flawed. I've recently had to publish stuff that was unfinished just to properly test something. For example testing a GTA race on creator doesn't let you exit your vehicle.

I know where op is coming from in a way though, but anything I have tested to the extent it bores me has been deleted before publication.

Plus the physics in the creator mode are different from the test mode and the test mode physics are different from racing physics and racing physics are different from free roam. It's an odd universe out there. Sometimes I like the creator physics as you can sit on a motorcycle on a stand still and do flips as you can hardly ever crash in a motorcycle in that mode.

And ramps always make the jump in creator but NEVER when published.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Flukey

[GTAMYBABIES]

@ op

 

Lol

 

Just do one lap and you're good.

 

 

 

The test is flawed. I've recently had to publish stuff that was unfinished just to properly test something. For example testing a GTA race on creator doesn't let you exit your vehicle.

I know where op is coming from in a way though, but anything I have tested to the extent it bores me has been deleted before publication.

Plus the physics in the creator mode are different from the test mode and the test mode physics are different from racing physics and racing physics are different from free roam. It's an odd universe out there. Sometimes I like the creator physics as you can sit on a motorcycle on a stand still and do flips as you can hardly ever crash in a motorcycle in that mode.

And ramps always make the jump in creator but NEVER when published. for people new to new tracks with them usually. Oh and I forgot to add freeroam physics are also different from spam. Edited May 24, 2014 by GTAMYBABIES

[Iroquois]

So you two aren't bothered at all by the idea of retesting a created race after removing a prop? Even if it's a long race? Even if it's for a miniscule portion of the track? Or even if its lack of presence wouldn't alter the race?

 

I guess I must be really bored of my own tracks lol and too quickly as well then

Edited May 24, 2014 by Iroquois

[raymond_calitri]

can anyone confirm -

 

if you uodate or republish one of your jobs, does it change your job link?

 

like you promote and link your job a bunch online, and then tweak a little thing and update it, and now all the linking you did before is wasted.

[Flukey]

Link me to your race. Sounds big.

 

Whenever I make a race I try to get a good lobby and follow everybody so I can see the flaws. Then I might go back and re-edit/retest it again. I do this until I'm happy there are no deathtrap corners or anything.

 

The link stays the same after republish.

Edited May 25, 2014 by Flukey

[Staten]

Having to re-test when you change any aspect of a race is a way to ensure that the race can still be completed. I think that's all the test option is designed to do; I think the rest of it (e.g. respawns for captures, leaving vehicles in GTA Races, etc.) was expected to be done in Online itself.

[GR Choke]

i agree with OP, it is really annoying

[B3astGTS]

It's annoying but has to be done to assist in preventing the release of broken creations. If they didn't implement that people could remove critical aspects of the race or troll by intentionally making something broken. For example without testing you could go back and edit a race to wall in part or all of the starting grid or you could say edit a capture and make one team's capture object unreachable.

Edited May 25, 2014 by B3astGTS

[Iroquois]

It's annoying but has to be done to assist in preventing the release of broken creations. If they didn't implement that people could remove critical aspects of the race or troll by intentionally making something broken. For example without testing you could go back and edit a race to wall in part or all of the starting grid or you could say edit a capture and make one team's capture object unreachable.

 

 

Having to re-test when you change any aspect of a race is a way to ensure that the race can still be completed. I think that's all the test option is designed to do; I think the rest of it (e.g. respawns for captures, leaving vehicles in GTA Races, etc.) was expected to be done in Online itself.

Wouldnt those only be for adding a prop? What if you would just remove it?

 

Imagine if you have a created race but with absolutely no props on it. Say you want to tweak it and add some objects to the track. By adding, you are creating obstructions to the race which could have negative influences on a race.

Now say, that track had only 1 object initally and you only wished to remove it. You would only be improving your race and having no negative consquences.

By removing props, it wouldnt make a difference if it was 1 or many, if it was in a secluded part of the map (away from the race) or if it was smack dab in the middle, or if the track never had any props whatsoever in the beginning, the result would be the same... = no interference.

 

Why must 1 waste 3-10 minutes driving around to get to the part where you removed that prop from? Wouldnt it be more simple to just remove it? It wouldnt even count in most cases as "re-testing" or "re-validating" a race, since ahead of time and assumingly of course, you have gotten rid of all the mistakes that you're aware of and now you just want to get rid of that prop. It'd be more like binning than retesting.

 

Like said previously, it is must for checkpoints as CP's could be broken if you remove, but for props? We should not have to retest it for the removal of props.

[Staten]

Removing a prop can make a job unplayable just as much as adding one can.

[BridgeHat]

Removing a prop can make a job unplayable just as much as adding one can.

Exactly.

 

What the OP fails to realize, that if for example I put a checkpoint on a rooftop with a ramp that enables access to it, then remove the ramp, it could become impossible to reach the checkpoint on the rooftop.

 

This is just one example of how removing a prop could make a race uncompletable.

[Cuz05]

Excellent point Bridge.

I have no issues retesting. I'll often run the whole race rather than just the necessary lap.

If its an old race then its interesting to revisit and having a cruise on it in test mode might uncover things that you're normally too busy to notice.

[Coin]

Removing a prop can make a job unplayable just as much as adding one can.

 

Bingo.

 

I would go so far as to suggest that other alterations (like changing the available vehicles) should also require you to test the track before publishing it, personally.

[Iroquois]

 

Removing a prop can make a job unplayable just as much as adding one can.

 

Exactly.

 

What the OP fails to realize, that if for example I put a checkpoint on a rooftop with a ramp that enables access to it, then remove the ramp, it could become impossible to reach the checkpoint on the rooftop.

 

This is just one example of how removing a prop could make a race uncompletable.

Good point but i did realize this. Of course you wouldnt want to remove a ramp and not retest it. Ramps would be the only exception to this.

[Fachuro]

Actually, I usually don't think about that at all when doing tests. All I'm thinking of is to keep my eyes open to look for my change and see how it worked, and wether or not any further changes would be necessary to make it the way I want it. It's alot of work, sure, but it's all a part of the process.

 

I've probably made a good 250 tracks alltogether now, and deleted the larger portion of them. Each of my tracks have been tested rigourously both in creator and multiplayer mode. If I'm not happy with my tracks I now remove them from online by making a saved copy and deleting the online version. That means I'm gonna have to test them again just to be able to play them, and not even that bothers me.

 

I love testing my tracks, and I know that when I don't, it's because there's an issue at some point I haven't figured out yet, but that bugs me enough that I don't like it. Then it shouldn't be online. The tracks I release to the public are only the ones I would love to drive over and over again all day through.

 

If not even YOU want to replay your track, then why would others?

[BridgeHat]

I don't mean to argumentative, but there's more examples I could give.

 

If someone makes a platform of props, puts a checkpoint on the platform, then deletes all the props, the same issue arises.

 

If someone makes a trials race where you have to hit a concrete bench to to elevate themselves.

 

If someone angle an alternate prop like an empty container to climb to a location.

 

In a nutshell though, R* are trying to cover themselves (or the races) for all variations by implementing the re-test after any alteration.

 

But as Insert said, it doesn't succeed entirely because I could test a race in motorcycles or super cars, then limit vehicle selection to lawn mowers and the players may well be screwed.

 

It's a slight inconvenience that we have to retest, but it minimizes the chance of broken jobs being unleashed upon the unsuspecting public.

 

---

 

Fachuro,

 

If it's long race intended for a large lobby, and I've played it 5+ times straight, it starts to feel cumbersome to me.

 

His frustration is reasonable. Not everyone enjoys testing, yet they may still understand it's importance.

Edited May 25, 2014 by BridgeHat

[Fachuro]

Fair enough argument there, even though personally I then just take it as a sign I should take a break and keep working on it But I do get your point.