Sure, I don’t disagree with that, I do a lot of QA/Testing myself.
But what I’m getting at is there should be an equitable release spread across the spectrum of products.
Perhaps if too many shovelware (or say below rating 2.5) products are getting pumped out they should be paused for a while and the releases from other devs given a shot, even if they take longer to test.
Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t.
What’s the criteria for running an aircraft test, whether it’s a low quality or high quality?
Roughly, it follows everything from a cold and dark/hot start through all phases of flight from take off to landing. The really big differentiator is systems depth and how much of that actually needs to be tested by MS QA in order to get a pass. The flight phases should be tested all the same, no matter what rating it has, to determine where it sits on the flight continuum from arcade to “realistic”, and anything in between. Model/texture/audio/docs++ quality the same.
How do they judge the “quality” of those phases/experience from a rating 1 to a rating 2 all the way to a rating 5? We don’t know.
Ditto for scenery or other adds, which should have their own QA checklists.