Jump to content

So what does the patch consist of?


Recommended Posts

Battlefront has repeatedly said that many of the problems that the reviewers are griping about in CMSF are fixed in the patch. But I really have trouble believing that a game that's been in the works for years suddenly got its AI/Pathfinding/UI/whatever problems fixed in a few weeks. So could we please get the rundown on what the patch fixed (specifics would be great!) for those of us not quite sure anymore about preordering?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all, "the patch" only refers to Paradox customers. If you bought a Paradox version you will need it to sync up with our Battlefront release version. Therefore it's not quite correct to speak about the patch as if the game was out already. It's not and our release version will be complete without a patch.

Secondly, the list of issues that were addressed in the past 5 weeks includes something like 300-400 bugs from our bug tracker. It's impossible to list them all. It would be fairly useless, too, because unless you know the problem the fix might not make much sense to you until described in great detail.

The way we develop games is different from many (most) other big developers. We spend the first year or two with designing the base engine, and then polish it, while the bigger labels first add the art and then the game (if any). This means that during the last 1-2 months you see the game change much more dramatically than during the first 1-2 years!

From the top of my head, some of the bigger issues that were addressed in the past weeks:

- unit pathfinding (especially for getting through small wall gaps that were blown during game)

- soldier animations

- reactive TacAI (especially for firing ATGMs)

- corrected AI scripting in some scenarios

- added resolution settings

- fixed a Dual Core bug

- optmized LODs

...and much more. It's really a huge list.

Martin

PS. However, don't take my word for it. If in doubt, grab the demo once it's out in the next day or two. That's why we release demos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its like walking down a long flat road. You've got a destination in mind but as far as you walk that horizon line still appears as far in the distance as it ever did. They got to 'that' point for the Paradox release, they're at 'this' point for the 1.01 release, they'll be that much further down the road for the Marine module, and so on and so on. Its only when you look back and peer at the CMx1 engine waaaay back down the road that you think 'Wow! I've really come quite a way!" The end of the road for game realism, I guess, would be a virtual reality brain insert like in the Matrix movies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by MikeyD:

The end of the road for game realism, I guess, would be a virtual reality brain insert like in the Matrix movies.

I'm counting the days... I can see myself rocking out in Unreal Tournament 14 (a veryyy unrealistic shooter... shhhh!) in retirement with some sort of brain implant :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Its like walking down a long flat road. You've got a destination in mind but as far as you walk that horizon line still appears as far in the distance as it ever did. They got to 'that' point for the Paradox release, they're at 'this' point for the 1.01 release, they'll be that much further down the road for the Marine module, and so on and so on. Its only when you look back and peer at the CMx1 engine waaaay back down the road that you think 'Wow! I've really come quite a way!" The end of the road for game realism, I guess, would be a virtual reality brain insert like in the Matrix movies.

There isn't a sane person alive that wants a realistic wargame at the tactical level. It would require the player - participant - to be able to go without sleep for 3 or 4 days, live in the rain and mud, carry from 20 to 180 pounds of gear on his back, know how to use a map and compass, a GPS, a radio, several types of grenade, pistol, rifle, grenade launcher, light mortar, anti-tank weapons, mines, entrenching tool, be able to conduct combat first aid, drive a vehicle, and on top of it - since he would want to be at least a squad leader - have an elementary knowledge of small unit tactics if not platoon and company tactics.

No one would play it, much less make money selling it to people.

Even if they marketed a Star Trek-style holodeck to people starting tomorrow, with all the software to do what I just described - there will still be products like CM:SF, just like there are still people who play Chess and Stratego instead of Squad Leader or CM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikeyD:

Its like walking down a long flat road. You've got a destination in mind but as far as you walk that horizon line still appears as far in the distance as it ever did. They got to 'that' point for the Paradox release, they're at 'this' point for the 1.01 release, they'll be that much further down the road for the Marine module, and so on and so on. Its only when you look back and peer at the CMx1 engine waaaay back down the road that you think 'Wow! I've really come quite a way!" The end of the road for game realism, I guess, would be a virtual reality brain insert like in the Matrix movies.

There isn't a sane person alive that wants a realistic wargame at the tactical level. It would require the player - participant - to be able to go without sleep for 3 or 4 days, live in the rain and mud, carry from 20 to 180 pounds of gear on his back, know how to use a map and compass, a GPS, a radio, several types of grenade, pistol, rifle, grenade launcher, light mortar, anti-tank weapons, mines, entrenching tool, be able to conduct combat first aid, drive a vehicle, and on top of it - since he would want to be at least a squad leader - have an elementary knowledge of small unit tactics if not platoon and company tactics.

No one would play it, much less make money selling it to people.

Even if they marketed a Star Trek-style holodeck to people starting tomorrow, with all the software to do what I just described - there will still be products like CM:SF, just like there are still people who play Chess and Stratego instead of Squad Leader or CM. </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MikeyD:

Its like walking down a long flat road. You've got a destination in mind but as far as you walk that horizon line still appears as far in the distance as it ever did. They got to 'that' point for the Paradox release, they're at 'this' point for the 1.01 release, they'll be that much further down the road for the Marine module, and so on and so on. Its only when you look back and peer at the CMx1 engine waaaay back down the road that you think 'Wow! I've really come quite a way!" The end of the road for game realism, I guess, would be a virtual reality brain insert like in the Matrix movies.

There isn't a sane person alive that wants a realistic wargame at the tactical level. It would require the player - participant - to be able to go without sleep for 3 or 4 days, live in the rain and mud, carry from 20 to 180 pounds of gear on his back, know how to use a map and compass, a GPS, a radio, several types of grenade, pistol, rifle, grenade launcher, light mortar, anti-tank weapons, mines, entrenching tool, be able to conduct combat first aid, drive a vehicle, and on top of it - since he would want to be at least a squad leader - have an elementary knowledge of small unit tactics if not platoon and company tactics.

No one would play it, much less make money selling it to people.

Even if they marketed a Star Trek-style holodeck to people starting tomorrow, with all the software to do what I just described - there will still be products like CM:SF, just like there are still people who play Chess and Stratego instead of Squad Leader or CM. </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drunk again? I like that. You sods should be encouraged to drink from the urinal I piss into in the hopes that it might raise your posts above the level of idiocy.
Sorry but those junior urinals are too low to the ground for me.Idiocy?Pot calling kettle, come in kettle...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pinetree:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Drunk again? I like that. You sods should be encouraged to drink from the urinal I piss into in the hopes that it might raise your posts above the level of idiocy.

Sorry but those junior urinals are too low to the ground for me. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by NoxSpartana:

Alright that's EXACTLY was I was asking for. Thanks for the quick response, I'm especially glad to see unit pathfinding and reactive TacAI on the list.

....

Hm ....

Moon wrote:

"unit pathfinding (especially for getting through small wall gaps that were blown during game)"

I read some "reviews and previews", and they dont say

"there are a little movement bugs with wall gaps that were blown during game".

They say "pathing doesnt work, AI doesnt work well".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Seanachai

What, you won't throw up into anything lower than the sink everyone else is washing their hands in?

Of course I do, but considering the way you pee, I'd get my knees wet.

Originally posted by Seanachai

Oh, look! The Kiwi is attempting to contact the Mother Ship...

I gave that up years ago..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Pinetree:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Seanachai

What, you won't throw up into anything lower than the sink everyone else is washing their hands in?

Of course I do, but considering the way you pee, I'd get my knees wet.</font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Seanachai:

Lad, the way I pee is from far, far above you. That way it trickles down on to the deserving like a punishment from on high.

That must be one big step-ladder..

Originally posted by Seanachai:

Lick your upper lip and contemplate whether that salty taste is reward enough to continue exchanging insults with me.

Heh, all in good fun.It's not so much the salty taste it's the smell of cheese that goes with it.

Originally posted by Seanachai:

I could drink some cherry cider if you want me to sweeten the taste a bit...

Maybe with a bit of cinnamon..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read some "reviews and previews", and they dont say

"there are a little movement bugs with wall gaps that were blown during game".

They say "pathing doesnt work, AI doesnt work well".

I would not expect reviews to give detailed explainations of in what cases something did not work. Most people, even trained QA, do not know WHY or in what specfic case something goes wrong, they just say it is broken.

This happened to me just the other day

QA Bug report.

"This bug is hard to reproduce but it has happened three times in the past 2 days" Then it went on to explain the bug...

After hours of research I find the problem. it turns out it would only if they had a certain subscreen open and operating then experienced an event that shut down that screen. Then previous event cleared, and the user opened the identical screen again. Then when they attempted to click on a button it crashed.

That is a heck of a big difference from "This bug is hard to reproduce but it has happened three times in the past 2 days". They where testing something else that caused that particular sequence of events to happen 3 times in 2 days.

It turned out that that code was 2 years old and they had just never encountered that bug yet.

This is all to say, Just because the reviewer gave a broad statement, does NOT mean that it is actauly true.

I'm not saying I am not a bit worried, but heck I pre-ordered, I will find out Saturday or Sunday if it was a waste of cash. I am willing to bet it will become just as near and dear to my heart as teh original WWII games from Battlefront.

Marc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...