<!--quoteo(post=2044290:date=Dec 12 2012, 03:38 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Dec 12 2012, 03:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044290"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Have you considered that people with bad FPS have simply stopped playing the game? Wouldn't that also increase your average framerate?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pretty much all the new players I have encountered that joined during release have stopped playing. But that is just around 5 players who's performance varied from good to average.
<!--quoteo(post=2044447:date=Dec 12 2012, 11:16 AM:name=PhOeNiX4)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PhOeNiX4 @ Dec 12 2012, 11:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044447"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My fps is drastically lower in combat with this patch.
i7 running @ 4GHz 16Gb Ram 2xGTX570 in sli
Was playing a match last night which I crashed out twice in. Through out the game players repeatedly crashed out at least 8 different times.
I think we may have a problem with this patch, it's not all great for everyone..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Were you using a jetpack? My game locked up when I was jetpacking to an armory and crashed.
<!--quoteo(post=2044290:date=Dec 12 2012, 10:38 AM:name=puzl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (puzl @ Dec 12 2012, 10:38 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044290"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Have you considered that people with bad FPS have simply stopped playing the game? Wouldn't that also increase your average framerate?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> We saw an immediate increase after the patch was out. So, unless a very large amount of people with poor FPS just suddenly decided to stop playing all at the exact same time, I doubt that is factoring in very heavily. Also, I'm sure there are a lot of players with good framerates who stopped playing, due to life obligations, or playing other games, or frustrated with other aspects of NS2 enough to quit.
Thanks for the continued work devs, sorry about the forum children and their nasty comments.
I won't comment on the emergence of certain issues as those have been addressed here already, my frame rate is good unless heading towards alien structures or engaging in combat at which point it falls to below 25fps, also pre caching takes me around 40 seconds. All graphics options set to low or off, 1920x1080.
So i dont know if this will help people, but i was getting small stuttering issues during combat with >3 people involved, so after some browsing i found this.
Basically, create a batch file to start NS2 as high priority, and this seemed to solve my issue, and also give me a bit better performance. (I'm averaging ~55 fps with a very similar rig)
Hope this helps!
<!--quoteo(post=2014149:date=Nov 7 2012, 08:14 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Nov 7 2012, 08:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2014149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have
AMD quad-core at 3.2 GHz 6 GiB of DDR3 Radeon HD 6870
so if it is an Intel issue then this seems to agree. Additionally if you want to run NS2 in high priority by default change the shortcut to open it up - in my case I made an NS2.bat in the same folder as NS2.exe and have it contain the line
then put a shortcut to that on my desktop (changing its icon to be the same as NS2.exe's) and that means I don't have to think about manually changing the priority when opening the game. There's no way to do it through Steam as yet but there seems to be suggestions that you can add a "-high" flag to the Steam launch options, but I believe this has to have support coded into the game in order to work. Of course different processes can request higher priorities if told to, so it might be something worth programming into the engine.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=2044531:date=Dec 12 2012, 07:31 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Dec 12 2012, 07:31 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044531"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We saw an immediate increase after the patch was out. So, unless a very large amount of people with poor FPS just suddenly decided to stop playing all at the exact same time, I doubt that is factoring in very heavily. Also, I'm sure there are a lot of players with good framerates who stopped playing, due to life obligations, or playing other games, or frustrated with other aspects of NS2 enough to quit.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I for just got a brand new 7870 to replace my aging 5770. Now I get 60 FPS, but suddenly I’m CPU limited since I still get drops down to ~30 when there is a lot of action. Guess the i5 760 is the bottleneck now. :(
I saw a large increase in FPS Went from 75 average or so to 100 average early game Mid-late game I get 70fps average or so With 5 heavys and everyone else on LMG assaulting a hive in veil I saw a dip to 29-28fps with fraps on which is 10fps higher than it was with similar conditions I get 180fps~ in the ready room All settings high but AO off One thing I did notice is weird bugs where players would randomly stop moving and you cant kill them I assume they died and their player model is still present on my screen
I never see the FPS drop when exos fighting until this build. - FPS going down for me - balance is horrible just look at stats - map veil is a joke with marines I am off for 3-4 month, my money is in good place at you guys, for NS1 not for this game. FPS drops with my rig is a bad joke
FPS was low near end game for me before patch, but now it's unplayable, even with everything at low.
I had everything maxed out before 230 patch, and could play fine no matter what happened.
With every new patch, my fps drop and drops... Now in combat it's so bad I can't even see what's going on... 5-10 fps average.
I'm done with this game until it is fixed, game is fun as hell, but the performance issues should be adressed first, before any "editor" bug fixes or whatever the hell was done in last patch (screw up the performance even more it seems?)
<!--quoteo(post=2043588:date=Dec 11 2012, 10:12 AM:name=SgtBarlow)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SgtBarlow @ Dec 11 2012, 10:12 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2043588"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Every single one of our team members post check-in notes with every single commit with TAGS. Problem is our team is international and we rely on wonky internet's to capture and store all the commits. There are times outages around the globe stop some notes from being logged, even the commit server its self goes down now and then. Also some notes have gone more so missing recently because of changes to the commit formatting to try and give us some sort of filtering options as well as parsing errors as a result of resolving issues in development of cross platform communication between systems that provide our teams with the info they need to do their jobs.
Some of our Build Commit lists are up-to 7 pages long for each build version full of things not at all relevant to the player base. For someone to sit there and go manually through every single message to collect and categorise all the changes is a bad allocation of what little time everyone has, we have always used a filter script to try and capture relevant changes but it has never been 100% for various reasons, We are trying to cater for the development team, the Play testers and the public change logs. The solution to this simple idea is not an easy one.
Any assumption (with no knowledgeable information of our internal affairs) that we are not actively trying to resolve our internal issues with patch notes is a poor one. It makes me sad :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you are not going to post accurate change logs, then why post any at all? This isn't a once and a while issue, its every patch, and sometimes its not little stuff that slips through the cracks. As well, if something does slip through, it only rarely appears in the next patches changelogs.
Seven pages of documentation might be tedious to sort through, but arguing that proper, accurate documentation is unmanageable because its hard or time consuming is an excuse and nothing more.
Do I want you to work on improving the game? Certainly. But I also don't want to be surprised by stumbling upon frustrating changes that weren't in the patch notes. And have to sit there and wonder if its a bug or something intentional.
<!--quoteo(post=2043698:date=Dec 11 2012, 01:08 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Dec 11 2012, 01:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2043698"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Edge smoothing is actually being worked on right now.
It is not laziness. Everything we spend time on comes at a cost. Parsing through all of the many checkins, making sure not a single thing has slipped through the cracks, compiling them in a way that the public can make sense of, takes a significant amount of time...time away from development on the game. Sgt. Barlow has been explaining some of the issues that cause some checkins to go missing. The patchnotes, for example, have a hard time dealing with, say, an optimization that has been worked on over a period of several patches, with many different changes made and tested, then reverted again.
In general, the amount of changes that are missing from this recent changelist is pretty small, and their impact on the game not very noticeable, so it should not be blown out of proportion. We are actively trying to improve the situation, however, but all of the changes and improvements that we make to the process will mean more time spent on patchnotes and less time on development.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When it comes to a working at a job, everything anyone spends time on comes at a cost, and this is especially meaningful for anyone in a startup company. That said, arguing that clear, accurate documentation is a waste of time because it takes away from development of the game is poor justification for forcing your playerbase to deal with consistent, often frustrating oversights.
Consider that for players, the expectation you're setting is that we can never know for sure whether or not some issue we encounter is the result of an intentional change or some bug. We can't trust your patch notes so we simply don't know what's going on.
Do whatever you want, but rationalizing your argument as you have seems dishonest and unprofessional.
<!--quoteo(post=2044060:date=Dec 11 2012, 08:02 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 11 2012, 08:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044060"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->UWE's changelog management system captures roughly 90% of the substantial changes with 10% of the work that would be required for someone to manage the queue manually. Its certainly not perfect, but I'd rather then work on game than managing the bug reports for the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd think that allocating a little bit more than 10% of the normal "work" would mean 100% accuracy then wouldn't it? Or are you just making up percentages off the top of your head?
<!--quoteo(post=2044198:date=Dec 11 2012, 10:47 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 11 2012, 10:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044198"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Forum posts are not representative of the NS2 playerbase and anecdote's don't equal data. I don't doubt that some people are having worse performance this patch (likely related to the fog), but - UWE is always working on improving performance - Patches are frequent (1-3 weeks) - Performance improvements don't always work linearly (i.e. sometimes its two steps forward, one step backwards)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Forum posts are representative of the player base that uses the forums. Anecdotes should never be used to validate empirical data, and yet here you are using them.
<!--quoteo(post=2043654:date=Dec 11 2012, 11:37 AM:name=SgtBarlow)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SgtBarlow @ Dec 11 2012, 11:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2043654"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My point is why make assumptions in the first place, instead if you notice something and want to know what's going on, why not just ask? For me I personally hate assumptions, It's a disease of the entire world that causes nothing but arguments, complications, war and death all avoidable by asking a simple question to find fact..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hate to burst your bubble, but everything you know as a fact is based off an assumption. Demonstrate unfiltered self-reflexive analysis to me, and I'll concede the point.
Also, as I believe someone else has mentioned in this thread, the only information the community has to judge UWE is what we can see for ourselves. The face you put forward is the only one we can judge. Chastising someone for making an assumption about something they could not know, in light of the fact that this is not the first time a developer has responded to this issue, seems contrary to your position. You're making an assumption about us and what we know as well, aren't you?
Rationalizing your development process by discounting criticism because "you're just making assumptions about us" is naive and foolish. If the feedback is inaccurate, then discount it, there is no need to rationalize or defend the point. But if is meaningful, then you should at least acknowledge it. Attempting to justify a problem by saying its not a problem seems disingenuous, however.
<!--quoteo(post=2044018:date=Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM:name=Fappuchino)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Fappuchino @ Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044018"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Really? The little addendum: "Stunt game growth due to fog" doesn't seem a little too much gilding? It's not like anyone else is complaining about it and predicting at the same time. Thanks for calling me ignorant though.
*The day I see a competitive player interact with other people without pointing out how he's competitive in some way or fashion, I'll eat a hat whole. Sheesh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, given the competitive players I've seen posting in this thread not doing that.. I think you should eat a hat!
Anyways, a bug like fog can definitely stunt game growth if it stayed in too long. Me calling you ignorant in this case stems from the fact that you said you liked the idea of the atmospherics. You like that a bug exists. Which.. to me.. was pretty ignorant.
"So is atmospherics permanent? I love that effect!"
But Max has already fixed it. So it won't be an issue thankfully.
<!--quoteo(post=2044019:date=Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM:name=6john)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (6john @ Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->everyone's on the same playing field, i don't see the big deal. it's a bug, and a fairly minor one at that. it's more cause to upset those who need to turn it down to run the game at all, than to upset those who need their precious 90 fps so they can dominate the 90% of people who just play pubs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Funnily enough, I know a lot of people that can't afford this sort of thing to run the game at all. Most that I gifted this game to have to upgrade or can't even play yet because it runs pretty poorly FPS wise. Insinuating that I'm talking about people with 90fps isn't even close.
But it's all a moot point because Max has fixed it already, all's good!
<!--quoteo(post=2044243:date=Dec 11 2012, 10:03 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Dec 11 2012, 10:03 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044243"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->We are planning on releasing another patch next week. The length of time between 232 and 233 was mainly due to the devs being on break for the thanksgiving holiday, and getting some much needed rest from the sprint leading up to release, and the time after fixing and releasing patches.
However, that said, we are wanting to move to a patch schedule that is something closer to 3 weeks (unless there is a major problem that needs addressing sooner). Weekly patches are just not very sustainable, as we end up spending so much of our time testing and fixing and releasing each of those patches, making it difficult to work on new features.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I appreciate the reply! I figured part of the problem with putting out frequent patches would be how much work the release process in itself takes. The main reason I hoped for patches at least every two weeks was so that people that might be frustrated with certain aspects of the game would only have to keep waiting two weeks to see if it gets solved. But I'm not sure if people do better with longer or shorter intervals when it comes to waiting for a desired outcome, with what people's attention span and patience seem to be I just assumed shorter.
Either way it sounds like we got something to look forward to in the new year!
So its nice you guys finally put who you are following when you die, but on the spectator mode where u can lock on person and follow still cant tell who you are following. So maybe on the next patch you guys can update that, it would be nice you u are following/watching
since last patch (233), now the game crashes often (it freezes and I have to alt-f4 it or kill it from the task manager)
The game never really run perfectly on my pc since I have old specs, but it never crashed either. It started with the last patch.
It crashes randomly (playing as commander, as normal soldier, marine, alien, doesnt matter) and at random times (after 5mins, after 2 hours, it can crash 3 times in a row in 15 minutes and dont crash for 5 maps). Random maps also.
I am pretty sure that before build 233 I didn't have this problem. I hope you can help!
<!--quoteo(post=2046090:date=Dec 14 2012, 11:33 PM:name=ZeEK91)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ZeEK91 @ Dec 14 2012, 11:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2046090"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->So its nice you guys finally put who you are following when you die, but on the spectator mode where u can lock on person and follow still cant tell who you are following. So maybe on the next patch you guys can update that, it would be nice you u are following/watching<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
+1. Also quite annoying that if you are following a player, when he dies you are obliged to follow another player
I also agree with what people says about giving priority to the game instead of the sdk and editor. The game is wonderful and I am trying to support it as much as i can, but still needs quite some love in optimizations and game content (games are becoming more and more predictable now that people are getting more experience... there's no so much choices in tactics or strategies, and some additional variety would really help)
Comments
i7 running @ 4GHz
16Gb Ram
2xGTX570 in sli
Was playing a match last night which I crashed out twice in. Through out the game players repeatedly crashed out at least 8 different times.
I think we may have a problem with this patch, it's not all great for everyone..
Pretty much all the new players I have encountered that joined during release have stopped playing. But that is just around 5 players who's performance varied from good to average.
I would like to check out the retention rates.
i7 running @ 4GHz
16Gb Ram
2xGTX570 in sli
Was playing a match last night which I crashed out twice in. Through out the game players repeatedly crashed out at least 8 different times.
I think we may have a problem with this patch, it's not all great for everyone..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Were you using a jetpack? My game locked up when I was jetpacking to an armory and crashed.
We saw an immediate increase after the patch was out. So, unless a very large amount of people with poor FPS just suddenly decided to stop playing all at the exact same time, I doubt that is factoring in very heavily. Also, I'm sure there are a lot of players with good framerates who stopped playing, due to life obligations, or playing other games, or frustrated with other aspects of NS2 enough to quit.
--Cory
I won't comment on the emergence of certain issues as those have been addressed here already, my frame rate is good unless heading towards alien structures or engaging in combat at which point it falls to below 25fps, also pre caching takes me around 40 seconds.
All graphics options set to low or off, 1920x1080.
Intel Core 2 Quad 3Ghz
8GB RAM
Geforce GTX580
Installed on SSD.
Edit :<b> Everytimes i get out of server browser & get to it again</b>.
Real physics or simulated ?
Still no jetpack in the ready room, shame ! :P
Basically, create a batch file to start NS2 as high priority, and this seemed to solve my issue, and also give me a bit better performance. (I'm averaging ~55 fps with a very similar rig)
Hope this helps!
<!--quoteo(post=2014149:date=Nov 7 2012, 08:14 AM:name=Tesseract)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tesseract @ Nov 7 2012, 08:14 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2014149"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I have
AMD quad-core at 3.2 GHz
6 GiB of DDR3
Radeon HD 6870
so if it is an Intel issue then this seems to agree. Additionally if you want to run NS2 in high priority by default change the shortcut to open it up - in my case I made an NS2.bat in the same folder as NS2.exe and have it contain the line
<!--c1--><div class='codetop'>CODE</div><div class='codemain'><!--ec1-->Start /high NS2.exe<!--c2--></div><!--ec2-->
then put a shortcut to that on my desktop (changing its icon to be the same as NS2.exe's) and that means I don't have to think about manually changing the priority when opening the game. There's no way to do it through Steam as yet but there seems to be suggestions that you can add a "-high" flag to the Steam launch options, but I believe this has to have support coded into the game in order to work. Of course different processes can request higher priorities if told to, so it might be something worth programming into the engine.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well I for just got a brand new 7870 to replace my aging 5770. Now I get 60 FPS, but suddenly I’m CPU limited since I still get drops down to ~30 when there is a lot of action.
Guess the i5 760 is the bottleneck now. :(
Went from 75 average or so to 100 average early game
Mid-late game I get 70fps average or so
With 5 heavys and everyone else on LMG assaulting a hive in veil I saw a dip to 29-28fps with fraps on which is 10fps higher than it was with similar conditions
I get 180fps~ in the ready room
All settings high but AO off
One thing I did notice is weird bugs where players would randomly stop moving and you cant kill them
I assume they died and their player model is still present on my screen
- FPS going down for me
- balance is horrible just look at stats
- map veil is a joke with marines
I am off for 3-4 month, my money is in good place at you guys, for NS1 not for this game.
FPS drops with my rig is a bad joke
I had everything maxed out before 230 patch, and could play fine no matter what happened.
With every new patch, my fps drop and drops... Now in combat it's so bad I can't even see what's going on... 5-10 fps average.
I'm done with this game until it is fixed, game is fun as hell, but the performance issues should be adressed first, before any "editor" bug fixes or whatever the hell was done in last patch (screw up the performance even more it seems?)
Why does it run so bad now...?
Also some notes have gone more so missing recently because of changes to the commit formatting to try and give us some sort of filtering options as well as parsing errors as a result of resolving issues in development of cross platform communication between systems that provide our teams with the info they need to do their jobs.
Some of our Build Commit lists are up-to 7 pages long for each build version full of things not at all relevant to the player base.
For someone to sit there and go manually through every single message to collect and categorise all the changes is a bad allocation of what little time everyone has, we have always used a filter script to try and capture relevant changes but it has never been 100% for various reasons, We are trying to cater for the development team, the Play testers and the public change logs.
The solution to this simple idea is not an easy one.
Any assumption (with no knowledgeable information of our internal affairs) that we are not actively trying to resolve our internal issues with patch notes is a poor one. It makes me sad :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you are not going to post accurate change logs, then why post any at all? This isn't a once and a while issue, its every patch, and sometimes its not little stuff that slips through the cracks. As well, if something does slip through, it only rarely appears in the next patches changelogs.
Seven pages of documentation might be tedious to sort through, but arguing that proper, accurate documentation is unmanageable because its hard or time consuming is an excuse and nothing more.
Do I want you to work on improving the game? Certainly. But I also don't want to be surprised by stumbling upon frustrating changes that weren't in the patch notes. And have to sit there and wonder if its a bug or something intentional.
<!--quoteo(post=2043698:date=Dec 11 2012, 01:08 PM:name=Squeal_Like_A_Pig)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Squeal_Like_A_Pig @ Dec 11 2012, 01:08 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2043698"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Edge smoothing is actually being worked on right now.
It is not laziness. Everything we spend time on comes at a cost. Parsing through all of the many checkins, making sure not a single thing has slipped through the cracks, compiling them in a way that the public can make sense of, takes a significant amount of time...time away from development on the game. Sgt. Barlow has been explaining some of the issues that cause some checkins to go missing. The patchnotes, for example, have a hard time dealing with, say, an optimization that has been worked on over a period of several patches, with many different changes made and tested, then reverted again.
In general, the amount of changes that are missing from this recent changelist is pretty small, and their impact on the game not very noticeable, so it should not be blown out of proportion. We are actively trying to improve the situation, however, but all of the changes and improvements that we make to the process will mean more time spent on patchnotes and less time on development.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When it comes to a working at a job, everything anyone spends time on comes at a cost, and this is especially meaningful for anyone in a startup company. That said, arguing that clear, accurate documentation is a waste of time because it takes away from development of the game is poor justification for forcing your playerbase to deal with consistent, often frustrating oversights.
Consider that for players, the expectation you're setting is that we can never know for sure whether or not some issue we encounter is the result of an intentional change or some bug. We can't trust your patch notes so we simply don't know what's going on.
Do whatever you want, but rationalizing your argument as you have seems dishonest and unprofessional.
<!--quoteo(post=2044060:date=Dec 11 2012, 08:02 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 11 2012, 08:02 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044060"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->UWE's changelog management system captures roughly 90% of the substantial changes with 10% of the work that would be required for someone to manage the queue manually. Its certainly not perfect, but I'd rather then work on game than managing the bug reports for the game.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd think that allocating a little bit more than 10% of the normal "work" would mean 100% accuracy then wouldn't it? Or are you just making up percentages off the top of your head?
<!--quoteo(post=2044198:date=Dec 11 2012, 10:47 PM:name=ScardyBob)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ScardyBob @ Dec 11 2012, 10:47 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044198"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Forum posts are not representative of the NS2 playerbase and anecdote's don't equal data. I don't doubt that some people are having worse performance this patch (likely related to the fog), but
- UWE is always working on improving performance
- Patches are frequent (1-3 weeks)
- Performance improvements don't always work linearly (i.e. sometimes its two steps forward, one step backwards)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Forum posts are representative of the player base that uses the forums. Anecdotes should never be used to validate empirical data, and yet here you are using them.
<!--quoteo(post=2043654:date=Dec 11 2012, 11:37 AM:name=SgtBarlow)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SgtBarlow @ Dec 11 2012, 11:37 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2043654"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->My point is why make assumptions in the first place, instead if you notice something and want to know what's going on, why not just ask?
For me I personally hate assumptions, It's a disease of the entire world that causes nothing but arguments, complications, war and death all avoidable by asking a simple question to find fact..<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hate to burst your bubble, but everything you know as a fact is based off an assumption. Demonstrate unfiltered self-reflexive analysis to me, and I'll concede the point.
Also, as I believe someone else has mentioned in this thread, the only information the community has to judge UWE is what we can see for ourselves. The face you put forward is the only one we can judge. Chastising someone for making an assumption about something they could not know, in light of the fact that this is not the first time a developer has responded to this issue, seems contrary to your position. You're making an assumption about us and what we know as well, aren't you?
Rationalizing your development process by discounting criticism because "you're just making assumptions about us" is naive and foolish. If the feedback is inaccurate, then discount it, there is no need to rationalize or defend the point. But if is meaningful, then you should at least acknowledge it. Attempting to justify a problem by saying its not a problem seems disingenuous, however.
Just a thought. Carry on.
Thanks for calling me ignorant though.
*The day I see a competitive player interact with other people without pointing out how he's competitive in some way or fashion, I'll eat a hat whole. Sheesh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, given the competitive players I've seen posting in this thread not doing that.. I think you should eat a hat!
Anyways, a bug like fog can definitely stunt game growth if it stayed in too long. Me calling you ignorant in this case stems from the fact that you said you liked the idea of the atmospherics. You like that a bug exists. Which.. to me.. was pretty ignorant.
"So is atmospherics permanent? I love that effect!"
But Max has already fixed it. So it won't be an issue thankfully.
<!--quoteo(post=2044019:date=Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM:name=6john)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (6john @ Dec 11 2012, 04:53 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2044019"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->everyone's on the same playing field, i don't see the big deal. it's a bug, and a fairly minor one at that. it's more cause to upset those who need to turn it down to run the game at all, than to upset those who need their precious 90 fps so they can dominate the 90% of people who just play pubs.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Funnily enough, I know a lot of people that can't afford this sort of thing to run the game at all. Most that I gifted this game to have to upgrade or can't even play yet because it runs pretty poorly FPS wise. Insinuating that I'm talking about people with 90fps isn't even close.
But it's all a moot point because Max has fixed it already, all's good!
However, that said, we are wanting to move to a patch schedule that is something closer to 3 weeks (unless there is a major problem that needs addressing sooner). Weekly patches are just not very sustainable, as we end up spending so much of our time testing and fixing and releasing each of those patches, making it difficult to work on new features.
--Cory<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I appreciate the reply! I figured part of the problem with putting out frequent patches would be how much work the release process in itself takes.
The main reason I hoped for patches at least every two weeks was so that people that might be frustrated with certain aspects of the game would only have to keep waiting two weeks to see if it gets solved. But I'm not sure if people do better with longer or shorter intervals when it comes to waiting for a desired outcome, with what people's attention span and patience seem to be I just assumed shorter.
Either way it sounds like we got something to look forward to in the new year!
Female Marines...why not!
ATT GL? overpowered...
nerfed ATT GL ... useles
The game never really run perfectly on my pc since I have old specs, but it never crashed either. It started with the last patch.
It crashes randomly (playing as commander, as normal soldier, marine, alien, doesnt matter) and at random times (after 5mins, after 2 hours, it can crash 3 times in a row in 15 minutes and dont crash for 5 maps). Random maps also.
I am pretty sure that before build 233 I didn't have this problem.
I hope you can help!
+1. Also quite annoying that if you are following a player, when he dies you are obliged to follow another player
I also agree with what people says about giving priority to the game instead of the sdk and editor. The game is wonderful and I am trying to support it as much as i can, but still needs quite some love in optimizations and game content (games are becoming more and more predictable now that people are getting more experience... there's no so much choices in tactics or strategies, and some additional variety would really help)