Jump to content

So, what's shake'n?


Recommended Posts

Oh, and yes... baring some sort of unforeseen technical disaster, CMx2 will be MacOS X native in the near future. However, the hardware might very well be a big issue.

We will not purposefully exclude support for PPC G4 and G5 chipsets, but we will also not devote much time to making CM work on them. If push comes to shove, we will support Intel based Macs only. The reason for that is quite simple... the PPC family is effectively dead. The hardware is already at least 2 years out of date and getting more out of date every day. Most of the PPC systems made earlier than 2 years ago probably aren't even powerful enough to run CM acceptably anyway, so why waste development time on the handful of systems that were made just prior to the changeover to Intel when that handful gets smaller each day as laptops crap out (I have a G4 that went tits up like so many others!) or are made 2nd systems when a newer Mac is added to the home? It's really not a smart move.

We'll just have to see how it goes. And of course we'll keep you informed :D

Philip... thanks for the offer!! I'll definitely pass it on to Charles. In fact, I just did!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Steve I know you've said you don't want to get into a trap with talking about things that are in 1.05, but you may be setting up for the opposite. I think one of the reasons negative vibes hit the boards after 1.04 is that a lot of hype drove expectations that 1.04 would solve a most problems. Depending on where customers sit, it left a lot unresolved.

With 1.05, beta testers keep posting about how this and that is being worked or fixed. Everyone is saying just wait for 1.05. It may be better in some ways to just let out some of the things you have fixed or are trying to fix or are pushing off to 1.XX. Right now 1.05 is positioned a heck of a lot higher than 1.04, and I'm worried that expectations being what they tend to be, will be deflated and we'll be back to the negativity. Give people around the web a good reason to talk about CMSF again.

btw, ask Charles if he can fix or do sumfink about the Pats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Oh, and yes... baring some sort of unforeseen technical disaster, CMx2 will be MacOS X native in the near future. However, the hardware might very well be a big issue. ...

Steve

Huzzah! Man, you just made my holidays. The only thing missing from my new iMac is a good game, and while I would have lived with having to switch over into Windoze every time I wanted a game fix, being able to just fire it up in Leopard will be a great convenience.

Looking forward to it. . .

Cheers,

YD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by dalem:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Pengers are free to abuse as much as anybody likes :P (OK, only if it is tongue in cheek or has the blessing of the Justicar for Life).

Woo hoo! Carte Blanche! Wait, Olde Foule Joe has to approve first?

But he hates me.

-dale </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Abbott:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Pengers are free to abuse as much as anybody likes tongue.gif (OK, only if it is tongue in cheek or has the blessing of the Justicar for Life).

Woo hoo! Carte Blanche! Wait, Olde Foule Joe has to approve first?

But he hates me.

-dale </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew it was a mistake to mention the MBT here. It's like saying "Spanish Inquisition" in a Monty Python sketch :D Ooo... and ironically there is a MP link to Peng. I didn't even think of that at first!

Thewood,

The problem with managing expectations is that there is no way to manage them :D If I say "version 1.05 is a very good patch and will fix many things" some people will adopt an attitude of "bah, it just nibbles around the edges and won't amount to a hill of beans". If I instead say "it fixes most of the problems" a different bunch will say "woohoo! It's going to be so great that cats and dogs will live together in peace." Which is why I've not really wanted to say much, if anything, about the patch.

Now, true enough the testers have been hinting at various things fixed already. There are over 60 fixes, tweaks, and new additions waiting for you guys. Some of the latter will be quite unexpected and very welcomed. For tweaks, there are many things that people have been asking for and about, some that people probably didn't know to ask about but will appreciate none-the-less. Bug fixes are always welcomed, obviously, but that doesn't mean CM:SF will be "bug free" as of v1.05.

What I can say, with full conviction, is that we'll start working on v1.06 as soon as v1.05 is out the door. Do I know of major problems already that we need v1.06 for? No, but I'm sure something will come up that we haven't found while testing. That's because testing is imperfect and inherently compromised. To ensure that v1.05 doesn't have any nasty surprises we'd have to freeze fixes and test it for a month before releasing it to you. That's never a good idea so the last few fixes go in just before the patch is released, and sometimes those last minute fixes cause problems. It's just the nature of the beast, unfortunately. You want patches quicker than we can put them out, so we tend to release them sooner than we should. Overall I think it's better this way because a net improvement is a net improvement.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

I think it's great that we will eventually have a native OS X version of CMSF, and I can understand your argument as to why the PPC chip is obsolescent/obsolete. Certainly, my lampshade 800 MHz G4 iMac with 512 MB SDRAM and 32 MB VRAM ATI Rage Pro chip would be hopeless, but I wouldn't write off the herkier, more powerful G4s and especially the cybernetically muscular G5s if I could avoid it. Even if that's not possible, I suspect many would be thrilled at simply being able to play CMSF on a Mac without firing up any other program or opening up any other partition.

Much easier and less upsetting to the devoted Mac user!

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Told you so, all you whiny old women. Now go eat crow.

Then play v1.05 and post constructive feedback on what further need fixing or sumfink.

I eagerly anticipate the arrival of a CMSF-capable PC in the new year and I look forward to playing the updated and improved version benefiting from the contstructive cooperation between BFC and the community.

PS: You lot (AND YOU KNOW WHO I MEAN) better be bloody grateful that I'm not the moderator on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joe Shaw:

Wait, Olde Foule Joe has to approve first?

But he hates me.

-dale

As to dalem he is my FRIEND and always shall be despite the fact that he's a right wing gun nut nut job.

Joe

If it make you feel any better dale, I still hate you, in that complicated love ya kind of way. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Steve,

I am going to visit family in another state for a week starting on the 24th. If you could get the 1.05 patch out a week before then, so I can play for at least a week, I'd appreciate it.

Also I'm still waiting for that pony people told me to expect from CMSF. Will it be in 1.06?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

There are no QB improvements in v1.05 that I can remember. Our plan was to spend significant time overhauling QBs in a much more fundamental way. Every hour spent on the old system means an hour not spent on an improved system. Having said that, I have a small but significant list of things I hope to get into v1.06.

Can you describe a little what the 'new' QB could look like and will it then probably available with the first module ('Marine'?)

Thanks.

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...