Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23532
Hi everyone,
We've been hard at work on a whole bunch of stuff here. Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace.
Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now for Friday the 17th, and the release version of it is scheduled for the Friday after that, June 24th.
The next patch will contain:
* Improved streamlined multiplayer GUI
* Other multiplayer improvements - more stability, all plane settings like convergence and paintscheme working at all times, less rare bugs, etc.
* Various graphical improvements. The distant clouds are finally back - i.e. the flat representations of clouds you saw on beta screenshots with pretty sunlit borders. Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
* Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
* AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.
* A new warship!
Other things that are in the pipeline:
* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest.
NOTE: this isn't an exhaustive list, but rather the main bullet points.
So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.
Edit/Delete Message
So in my opinion SOUND, FPS, and Online Stability are the next foundational problems to be tackled within the game. Addressing other issues without ensuring these mentioned are implemented correctly would be like adding window dressings to a house whose foundation is faulty. Discussing the new problems would be foolish and time wasting. If significant progress isn't made or if progress that most of us wouldn't understand is attained, what good would talking about it be? A waste of time IMO.
I guess I don't understand what you folks want as far as a future road map and progress updates. If there's nothing new to report do you really think this crowd is going to sit down for, "There's no new news folks?" I doubt it.
Damned if he does. Damned if he doesn't. I guess for me, this is enough for now. I'd expect updates closer to when these things are finalized or they've reached a development plateau. As he wrote: "Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace."
If it matters. I abstained from voting.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert
So then I'd obviously vote yes, because I WANT updates in a regular manner. I'm just not sure if updates can be done on a regular basis when the road map is so fluid ATM. One man's regular interval. may be anothers desert of information.
Being that I'm satisfied with the updates for now, and knowing many aren't, I don't think that's how the poll would be perceived. I think many will use it as a 'war cry' to muster up support and try to strong arm information or updates, when for me the regularity (or lack thereof) is fine with me.
I want updates. I'm fine with the way they are coming out. I don't think that's how the poll reads.
Say you get 100 yeahs.... 5 nays.... and 1 maybe. That says 100 want information. Fine. We all do. But it doesn't say that out of 100 there may be 50 who are satisfied with update progress. It CAN be construed to mean that 100 people want regular updates and all 100 think you're not doing a good job of it. That's why I abstained.
|
You just saved me a lot of typing, +1.
If there's nothing new to report, a simple "hey guys, we're still working on feature X and it's coming along at such and such pace" is the only thing that can be reasonably reported to us in an update.
That's what, 2-3 lines? Well that's exactly what we got yesterday in the last update and it's what can reasonably be expected until the next milestone in the roadmap is reached (banjo video notwithstanding), yet people flail about nonetheless.
If a road map changes every week it's not much of a roadmap, so i guess we're also out of things to report on that front as well.
As such, i didn't vote because i consider the poll options unsuitable to reflect the true conditions of the current situation: there's not much to report until something is finished, a beta sample is ready for testing, or the majority of the forum are professional programmers with prior knowledge of the CoD source code so that they will be able to understand a block of C++ posted in a future update where Luthier tells us how they go about implementing dynamic weather or something similar
What do you think the reaction would be?:
1) "wow, i don't know what this means but thanks for being so open about it?"
or
2) "what in god's name is this technical jargon mambo jumbo/you call this an update/it's clear they are mocking us/ we want a preview video and a patch release date"
Here's another poll for us all
In other words, updates just for the sake of getting them is only a recipe for repetitive or empty posts, unless there is something tangible to report.
It's not a matter of whether we want updates or not, everyone does. It's a matter of whether there's anything to update us on that the majority of the forum can make sense of without seeing a final, complete result.
I seriously doubt there currently is such a thing, especially seeing how hung up the loudest crowd is on easy to spot superficial details and completely misses all the gameplay-relevant details and fixes needed under the hood (where they haven't bothered to look much because the fields are too green and the tracers too thick) so the way updates are currently handled is fine for me: it seems the majority of people who create the "want updates" wave is mostly focused on things they can see or hear, but there's no new pretty pictures to show and the sounds are not ready yet.
You know what fixes i would be ecstatic about? Fixing the gyrocompass in the Ju88 so that it can use its level bombing autopilot and actually fly the mission it's intended to, tweak the CEM to correct the current inaccuracies in FM, adjust the turret behaviour on bombers with powered turrets so they can be used as intented and redo the anthropomoprhic controls to filter out controller spikes and take into account control proximity instead of having an arbitrary "two hand limit".
However, these are not fixes that can be displayed until they are done and a demo video is uploaded for us to see. I wouldn't understand a thing about how they do it in the code, so a simple "we're fixing the issues with the bombers" is all i need to hear.
To start wrapping this up, if the poll had a "none of the above, i have another opinion (please elaborate in post)" option, i would have gone with that. I think the options are a bit too "railroaded" for me and while it's true we can't have polls with 19765 options to reflect every opinion, i think the current choices are a bit too limited: they will result in an overwhelming "yes, we want updates" verdict without making any mention of the issues presented above in the rest of my post and the quotes provided, which is actually the biggest part of why there are no regular updates at this time.
As such, i consider it a non-representative poll (there's no immediately visible way to know how many people read the poll but abstained, which would be a good indication of how the community gauges the validity of the poll, unless we start comparing the amount of views and votes), abstain from voting and i will openly challenge the interpretation of its very predictable results if it ends up being used as a "leverage point" further down the road. Nothing personal of course, i'm just taking the clinical approach here and telling it how i see it:
The poll is skewed (i'm not saying it's done on purpose, it's just skewed), the results will be the same and as such, it doesn't qualify for much of an argument/evidence. For example, people may vote "i don't want updates" if they think it's skewed on purpose, just to spite off the ones who demand the updates, if it happened to be a majority would the result be valid?
Some people may like to make fun of him, but the guy in the below quote got it all right in much fewer words than i used:
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
this poll reminded me of this:
i bet you one million internetz at a toss of a coin:
heads i win
tails you lose
toss the coin and give me the internets if you lose |
