- Joined
- Aug 30, 2013
- Messages
- 1,744
- Reaction score
- 323
Main update is taking way too long...
- Thread starter Archer6621
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2013
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 11
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2013
- Messages
- 134
- Reaction score
- 50
I\'m with the OP on this one. I have no problem with Schema taking his time making sure everything is groovy, but two months and counting is a long time to go without any update whatsoever. Moreso when you consider that the last patch actually broke a few things that were working before, like the beam effect on astrotech, salvage, and other constant-beam type items. One would expect at least a hotfix patch for those things.
Schema\'s still awesome in My book, but two months is a bit of a stretch.
Schema\'s still awesome in My book, but two months is a bit of a stretch.
ImperialDonut
Overlord of the North Pole
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2013
- Messages
- 287
- Reaction score
- 101
I would definitely use dev builds more this way, rather than having to check, download and apply every new build and hotfix seperately.
Hi,
I agree with the OP (2 months is too long), and when there isn\'t much communication from the only developer for a significant part of that time (e.g. the \"pre-Calbiri\" part) it\'s even worse - you can expect most of the community to disappear.
However; it\'s not necessarily as bad as it seems. I\'m sure there are a lot of people (like me) who used to play Starmade and stopped, but still check the website now and then hoping that something was released. I wouldn\'t be surprised if half of the people that left come back again within 1 week of a release appearing.
I also strongly suspect that the previous StarMade code contained design problems - the sorts of problems that prevent you adding certain new features and make it harder/slow to add others. This is almost unavoidable - you start with a design that seems good for the things you can foresee, but eventually you find its not so good for the things you couldn\'t foresee.
For example, a developer might start out by deciding that things will be stored a certain way in memory, then write a whole bunch of code that expects things stored a certain way. Later on they might decide the way things are stored needs to change, and end up needing to break (and then fix) a large amount of code.
It can also take a significant amount of time to fix these sorts of problems. The more code you add, the harder it is to fix. Fixing these sorts of problems sooner (when there\'s less code depending on it) is important.
Now; we do know that Schema has changed the way things are stored in memory (Dynamic Traversable Octrees). We know he\'s redesigned 3d model handling and system rotation. We know he\'s changed weapon systems. We know he\'s changed almost everything involving lighting and cameras, and texture loading, and background tasks, and gravity, and....
Based on all of this, it sounds to me like over half of the old code has been replaced.If that\'s the case (e.g. there were design problems, and Schema has been doing the painful/slow job of fixing them), then it\'s a very good thing - far better than not fixing them and just doing more releases, and making it much much harder to fix them later on.
I agree with the OP (2 months is too long), and when there isn\'t much communication from the only developer for a significant part of that time (e.g. the \"pre-Calbiri\" part) it\'s even worse - you can expect most of the community to disappear.
However; it\'s not necessarily as bad as it seems. I\'m sure there are a lot of people (like me) who used to play Starmade and stopped, but still check the website now and then hoping that something was released. I wouldn\'t be surprised if half of the people that left come back again within 1 week of a release appearing.
I also strongly suspect that the previous StarMade code contained design problems - the sorts of problems that prevent you adding certain new features and make it harder/slow to add others. This is almost unavoidable - you start with a design that seems good for the things you can foresee, but eventually you find its not so good for the things you couldn\'t foresee.
For example, a developer might start out by deciding that things will be stored a certain way in memory, then write a whole bunch of code that expects things stored a certain way. Later on they might decide the way things are stored needs to change, and end up needing to break (and then fix) a large amount of code.
It can also take a significant amount of time to fix these sorts of problems. The more code you add, the harder it is to fix. Fixing these sorts of problems sooner (when there\'s less code depending on it) is important.
Now; we do know that Schema has changed the way things are stored in memory (Dynamic Traversable Octrees). We know he\'s redesigned 3d model handling and system rotation. We know he\'s changed weapon systems. We know he\'s changed almost everything involving lighting and cameras, and texture loading, and background tasks, and gravity, and....
Based on all of this, it sounds to me like over half of the old code has been replaced.If that\'s the case (e.g. there were design problems, and Schema has been doing the painful/slow job of fixing them), then it\'s a very good thing - far better than not fixing them and just doing more releases, and making it much much harder to fix them later on.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2013
- Messages
- 710
- Reaction score
- 11
Last few bits of news were very pleasing, I think stuff can only go upwards from this point on 
And I agree, if it takes a bit longer to provide future sustainability then I\'m all for it, but some more news a month ago or so would\'ve been welcome. I\'m glad that\'s happening frequently enough now though!
And I agree, if it takes a bit longer to provide future sustainability then I\'m all for it, but some more news a month ago or so would\'ve been welcome. I\'m glad that\'s happening frequently enough now though!