Quote - > Quote - I can tell you from when I was a tester a few years back, much more than just file path errors and missing textures are tested.  We were expected to test the actual product for usability, and the review team reviews it for marketability before it even gets to testing.  Just FYI ;)

From my experience, it is just not the same level of QC. Yes, Renderosity tests for pathes and such (nevertheless, I got a product with wrong paths more than once) and they check, for example, for all advertised features (like morphs) to be actually in pack and spinning with some result. But Renderosity doesn't appear to test for -quality- of those features. Once I got a product where morphs looked like they were translated with a help of Morphing Clothes with obviously no manual tune-up from a side of the vendor. Promos was done in such a cleaver way that it wasn't obvious from pictures (promos are always like that).
The result looked awful. I coudn't use the product and I coudn't ask for refund, because, technically, the product had the announced feature. It is just that quality of that feature was bad and QC/QA didn't bother to work with vendor to fix it before the release, because, FWIK, it isn't a purpose of testing on this marketplace.
Comparatively with the quality of testing of DAZ3D it isn't the same level. Sure, DAZ3D has mishaps sometimes, but very rarely on my memory in rate of total items and I can always ask for refund if I don't like the quality. So what with the 50/50% cut for that low level testing and no technical support from Renderosity? Not understandable to me.

Still, when you get a product like that, I'd contact (in this case) both the vendor and the store staff, let them know why you're disappointed.  I know it feels like, sometimes, words fall on deaf ears, but you'd be surprised at how many times they don't.  

Sitemail | Freestuff | Craftythings | Youtube|

Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it into a fruit salad.