Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 71

Author Topic: Starsector 0.6a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 553322 times)

CrashToDesktop

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #750 on: September 11, 2013, 12:37:58 PM »

Someone from THQ?

Nonetheless, I digress.  The changelog is certainly admirable, but it will come sooner or later.
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #751 on: September 11, 2013, 12:40:19 PM »

Since we seem to be on the topic of the game development process: Alex, how do you feel about small projects like your own hiring more people as they become more successful? That is, people who would be up to their arms in coding and testing and coming up/implementing with new features rather than doing more independent work on commission. (I'm not saying you need to hire someone btw, just wondering :P) If I was running one it would be exciting to have faster completion and brainstorming, but I'd be worried about more and more time going into management and about losing creative control.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #752 on: September 11, 2013, 12:59:11 PM »

I definitely *want* to have a shorter release cycle, and will do my best to make that happen.

What is your opinion on dividing releases into stable and unstable builds? Unstable builds could be released only in the forum whenever a new feature is implemented, accepting all the untied ends and, well, instability.  

They could help to counter some issues a long release cycle has. I'm not talking about simple impatience or fading interest here. I think many of us feel increasingly disconnected with the current state of the next release, which means it gets harder and harder to understand and appreciate the new features you introduce in blogposts and patchnotes. That in turn means that it gets harder to utter constructive criticism, make suggestions or plan mods.
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #753 on: September 11, 2013, 02:45:51 PM »

I believe you mean THQ?  We HAD to be out of studio by 4pm.  I always thought it was due to security with the current build data but now you mention it, we did have a lot more social time :)

Yeah, I think that was it. Still can't find the article! Also, can't help but think that's not such a good example anymore, what with THQ going bankrupt and all.

Since we seem to be on the topic of the game development process: Alex, how do you feel about small projects like your own hiring more people as they become more successful? That is, people who would be up to their arms in coding and testing and coming up/implementing with new features rather than doing more independent work on commission. (I'm not saying you need to hire someone btw, just wondering :P) If I was running one it would be exciting to have faster completion and brainstorming, but I'd be worried about more and more time going into management and about losing creative control.

It's a complicated question. First of all, hiring a full-time programmer is really expensive; a project would have to be considerably more, ah, successful than Starsector currently is to do that. You could possibly come to some kind of percentage arrangement, but that seems difficult to get right, unless the people know each other well and start out as partners. What's fair? How do you ensure that the person then pulls their weight?

Spending more time managing is a concern, of course. As far as ceding creative control, I think you have to be willing to do that if you're going to work with other people, regardless of whether they're a programmer/artist/sound designer. But really, that's not so much "ceding creative control" as it is letting people make awesome stuff they're good at making without getting in the way too much :)


I definitely *want* to have a shorter release cycle, and will do my best to make that happen.

What is your opinion on dividing releases into stable and unstable builds? Unstable builds could be released only in the forum whenever a new feature is implemented, accepting all the untied ends and, well, instability.  

They could help to counter some issues a long release cycle has. I'm not talking about simple impatience or fading interest here. I think many of us feel increasingly disconnected with the current state of the next release, which means it gets harder and harder to understand and appreciate the new features you introduce in blogposts and patchnotes. That in turn means that it gets harder to utter constructive criticism, make suggestions or plan mods.

Yeah, I definitely caught that comment from mendonca and it makes sense. There are lots of potential issues with releasing unstable builds, though. First of all, 0.6a hasn't been in a releasable state - even as an "unstable build" - until very recently, just because some critical UI elements weren't in place. The other issue is that feedback on a build like that wouldn't be very useful, whether its bug reports (for things I already know are broken) or suggestions (for things that are incomplete and thus shouldn't be judged on their current merits).

Also, a lot of the time I'll be working on one feature while waiting on some assets/internal feedback for another, and when things are interleaved like that, it makes for pretty efficient progress but, unfortunately, less clear "this is releasable" points. So what happens is before a release there's a period where I've stopped adding features, and switch to playtesting while waiting on some assets (which, incidentally, is the phase 0.6a is in now.) For unstable builds, the time currently spent playtesting would basically be wasted. Unless you create a code branch, but that's a considerable pain to deal with, and, again, takes more time.

But really, for me it comes down to what I'm comfortable releasing. I'd hate for something totally busted to end up in the hands of someone doing a preview, for example, and screenshots of things tend to find their way around. That said, I really don't want the next release to take as long as 0.6a did!
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #754 on: September 11, 2013, 03:25:15 PM »

Thanks for the answers and explanations. As long as we keep progressing steadily towards the space game of my dreams, I don't care so much at which rate :)
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

rada660

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 277
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #755 on: September 11, 2013, 07:51:49 PM »

It been since march I'm waiting for this version to come out... Why does alex doesn't just release the thing at every new update? :(
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #756 on: September 11, 2013, 07:55:00 PM »

It been since march I'm waiting for this version to come out... Why does alex doesn't just release the thing at every new update? :(

I'm going to direct your attention to the three paragraphs he just wrote on the subject two posts ago.
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #757 on: September 11, 2013, 09:17:45 PM »

@Alex:

I hear you on all that.  I've always tried to adhere to Release Early, Release Often philosophies, even where I wasn't absolutely sure about QA, (and yes, that's bit me on the butt more than once, but a patch a few hours after a report, and I've found most people are pretty forgiving), but for things like this, where the kneebone's connected to the thighbone and so forth and so on, there isn't much you can do, other than say, "hey, I'm in the middle of all this, there is a plan and it's getting done".  

It's never felt (from here) that you've had too much trouble with Kitchen Sink issues, which are typically where things crash and burn.  I really think this was the big hump, but you've kept it manageable.  It's never wise to bite something you can't even see the end of, you end up like that girl in the Shel Silverstein poem who ate the whale ;)

Unless I don't understand the mechanical changes under the hood, it should be possible to keep the release cycle shorter after this; I think you may underestimate just how many issues were made much more manageable by building dialog / UI-kit stuff, and I am glad you took up that model, it's a hugely powerful tool for fleshing things out.
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

BHunterSEAL

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #758 on: September 11, 2013, 10:29:34 PM »

After reading Alex's posts, it's pretty clear that a lot of thought has gone into the release strategy. I'm also getting increasingly hopeful due to the uses of past-tense...


 
Logged

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 5078
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #759 on: September 11, 2013, 11:44:18 PM »

Couldn't you have done that much homework before posting a rant?  ;)

Anyhow, welcome to the Forums.  We're usually nice :)
Logged
Please check out my SS projects :)
Xeno's Mod Pack

RawCode

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #760 on: September 12, 2013, 03:21:07 AM »

just call game "half-sector 3" and all complains about "long cycle" will gone.
Logged

Okim

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2161
    • View Profile
    • Okim`s Modelling stuff
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #761 on: September 12, 2013, 03:22:21 AM »

That sounds a bit... rude :)

But i see the point.

RawCode

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 511
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #762 on: September 12, 2013, 06:16:32 AM »

i have intopic questions:

what JVM will be included with 060?
can i change JVM for my own without violating EULA?
Logged

Gabriel_Braun

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #763 on: September 12, 2013, 08:34:27 AM »

@The_Soldier:

Yeah, going back a while to after EA in Surrey but those were the days :)

@Alex:

Am I reading it correctly that there TWO systems in the .6 candidate?  I ask this in wondering if there's a technical issue to adding more systems and their interacting traffic or if you have only added one other system as POC?  Is it feasible that Lazy Wizard's (Correct me if I'm wrong!) procedural generation code can generate on runtime a unique sector?    Oh gods I hope so! :D

Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #764 on: September 12, 2013, 08:47:56 AM »

@Alex:

I hear you on all that.  I've always tried to adhere to Release Early, Release Often philosophies, even where I wasn't absolutely sure about QA, (and yes, that's bit me on the butt more than once, but a patch a few hours after a report, and I've found most people are pretty forgiving), but for things like this, where the kneebone's connected to the thighbone and so forth and so on, there isn't much you can do, other than say, "hey, I'm in the middle of all this, there is a plan and it's getting done".  

It's never felt (from here) that you've had too much trouble with Kitchen Sink issues, which are typically where things crash and burn.  I really think this was the big hump, but you've kept it manageable.  It's never wise to bite something you can't even see the end of, you end up like that girl in the Shel Silverstein poem who ate the whale ;)

Unless I don't understand the mechanical changes under the hood, it should be possible to keep the release cycle shorter after this; I think you may underestimate just how many issues were made much more manageable by building dialog / UI-kit stuff, and I am glad you took up that model, it's a hugely powerful tool for fleshing things out.

Thanks for the understanding/vote of confidence :)

Yeah, I'm hoping it'll go more smoothly as well - as you point out, one of the main reasons for the dialog model is, in fact, to make it easier to add features by settling on a common interface paradigm. (Did I really just use that word? Sigh.)


After reading Alex's posts, it's pretty clear that a lot of thought has gone into the release strategy. I'm also getting increasingly hopeful due to the uses of past-tense...
Couldn't you have done that much homework before posting a rant?  ;)

Anyhow, welcome to the Forums.  We're usually nice :)

*cough*I think he meant the posts in this thread.*cough*


Am I reading it correctly that there TWO systems in the .6 candidate?  I ask this in wondering if there's a technical issue to adding more systems and their interacting traffic or if you have only added one other system as POC?  Is it feasible that Lazy Wizard's (Correct me if I'm wrong!) procedural generation code can generate on runtime a unique sector?    Oh gods I hope so! :D

It's definitely possible to add more systems. You might run into issues with the savegame file size w/o turning on save compression, though. The reason there aren't more in 0.6a is there's not really that much to do with them as a player (yet!), so...

what JVM will be included with 060?
can i change JVM for my own without violating EULA?

Still 6, though I'd like to upgrade to 7 soon, as well as bundle 7 with the mac release. (From what I hear, 7 is something like 10% faster, though I'll believe that when I see it.)

Yes, you can absolutely use whatever JVM you like.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52 53 ... 71