Stable Patch or Features/Content Poll

[FS~Phat]

Originally Posted by col123

Voted Stable patch..but in all honesty this is an obvious requirement!.....pretty stupid and pointless poll if u ask me!...

Yes of course CLOD needs stability..it needs decent smooth fps with no stutter..it needs lots of fixing and stability for the basic code/engine...thats a basic requirement for any game!

But it ALSO needs proper sounds, a real proper Campaign mode!..., better terrain, better clouds, better AI, better AA, better weather, in fact apart from the nice Virtual cockpits it really needs better everything!.....so what is the point of this poll?....you should have done a huge mult option/answer poll instead of the two obvious options....

This Poll is pointless!...you may as well have a poll on what do you think is most important or needed to make a good cup of coffee...


A/water....

or

B/milk, coffee, cream & sugar

I voted A/ water cos without it you cant even begin to make a coffee!

That coffee poll is just about as useful as your poll!

Not really pointless mate. Im interested in seeing how many people think the games is running OK that just want more content or features activated vs those that want it more stable because they are having problems.

The point is that Luthier will look at this and hopefully realise that the majority of users just want stability above all else and the team will hopefully put all efforts into making it stable before doing things like they did over last couple patches. Things like change lighting models, reenable propellers and the like.

These sorts of things being done in HOTFIX's is not a great idea, as this latest one has proven.. It breaks things while fixing others.

I understand its hard in development because you have different teams (or maybe persons in their case) working on different areas and potentially on different code branches that eventually get merged for integration testing.

The point is that if you introduce something new to something your trying to fix and you have different code branches (which is likely in this case) you are nearly always going to break something at the same time that your fixing something.. one step forward... two steps back. Sound familiar?

Its a trade off for cost vs function vs speed to market. In this case the product is out and they have recovered some costs with an incomplete game. Its time to stop stuffing around and just focus on performance and stability first. For me the stability has gotten worse since the initial release and maximum performance of the game engine has gone up and down massively as has the overall smoothness of the game.

[Redroach]

Maybe we should repeat it... a 'stable patch' is a frickin' matter of course! A patch which does nothing is perfectly stable. Professional programmers get paid for providing patches which don't f*** up your system/game in 2 other places. There is no point, as col123 said.
It seems like you got used to 1C/maddox's current modus operandi, but really, it should work a lot smoother - 1C is not a good measure right now, sad as it is.
To say it again, for good measure: Patches are the things which make programs more stable, not less. That's completely clear in the first place. Starting patches should fix some bugs left over from beta testing; subsequent ones are nomally provided to introduce new content (that could be buggy as well, so a small part will remain bug-fixing). Read: Stability comes along with new stuff. - maybe a little bit ahed, but still... I haven't seen a pure bug-fixing patch for a long time.