Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Update 01.087 - Deathmatch scenario support

Discussion in 'Change Log' started by Drui, Jun 18, 2015.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. TEOTWAWKI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    571
    There are a lot of people posting similar remarks that seem to be ignoring what people are saying. You seem to be replying to what you think we said rather than what we actually said.

    I don't care how long it takes for planets/netcode/optimization/mission-critical-fixes... so long as those are the things being worked on. I would rather go MONTHS without new content if it means the core features, critical bugs, long standing issues, and overall optimization are being worked on. It will take as long as it takes, but don't waste resources on features that belong at the end of the development schedule, as the final "gold" release bonus features.

    I don't see anything wrong with weekly updates... so long as what's being updated is relevant, necessary, and appropriate for the stage of development in question. I didn't buy Space Engineers to play deathmatch against flag capturing space racers.

    I would much rather skip updates knowing that important works are the focus than end up with Call of Duty in Space.

    Well... to answer your question...

    With mods to implement the flags... yes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  2. wd56 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    147
    I think a lot of the angst is to do with the fact that they are releasing small stuff from multiplayer but multiplayer is pretty much unplayable in its current state. So these updates are pretty much useless. You really want to try deathmatch in multiplayer where everyone will be lagging, framerate drops constantly.

    I get that they are releasing small things while they wait for big one to be ready, but instead of releasing updates that only a small part of community can play, maybe they should just release bug fixes instead. When the github thing opened, we had two full weeks for community fixes. However this update and the previous update they stopped that.

    I have no problem with them taking the time to get planets prepped properly nor do I have issues with them taking their time with the multiplayer netcode. However instead of releasing items that are pretty much useless, given the current state of multiplayer, maybe they should just concentrate on releasing bug fixes (while waiting for the big updates). I know that a lot of the die hards here will start frothing alpha is for content and beta for bugs but its not written in stone. I remember last year, around oct-nov, they went through 3 weeks of bug fixing updates. So it is possible.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2015
  3. Blackrauser Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    Planets do not make sense in the current multiplayer.
    the current multiplayer is crap...
     
  4. TEOTWAWKI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    571
    Check this out...

    They need to implement some of the bigger features before wrapping up the new multiplayer netcode. Yes, current multiplayer is crap, but new netcode is in the works.
     
  5. Zyfe Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    64
    They are being worked on, along with smaller things. That is the entire point of my post. :pbjt:
     
  6. g4borg Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    271
    you have two different approaches in how to create software:

    a) the genius programmer: he knows, multiplayer is an essence, knows ping will always be an issue, knows, that the earth is rather big and no cables run through its core and even light needs some time to travel around; he knows, network has to be compact, efficient, and have genius integration system, advanced lerping functions, and starts building the network code byte by byte; he knows he has to find a balance between streaming fast data and sending larger sync packets. he builds the network first, and does every decision for his software based on that network code. he works mostly alone, and all he cares about is efficiency. all following features have to utilize his network basement, and he does not plan to rewrite it later. he cares about what he knows best, and likes to preoptimize. he will have problems with any software integrated, that does not follow the base strategy of his solution, e.g. like a physics system which is not precalculable.

    b) the organized developer: he knows, optimizing anything is only possible once you know what you are going to use it for. he knows, he can trade overhead for speed, and optimize problems once they are clearly visible. the network does not have to be completely perfect, because he knows, the company will just assign more devs at critical problems and he likes to measure problems before fixing them. his main agenda is to create the product, not one technical feature, and he knows, the perfect product needs the programmer in a. working on the network one day, because that guy does things he does not really know how, but he also knows, the genius programmer will do a much better job, if he can show him what he wants the network to be used for. he can free up cpu cycles or memory, by regulating other facets of the app and as a team the product in the end becomes something bigger, than any part of the team could have achieved.

    most people tend to think like a, even if they work as b. a does not want to create a product, he wants to create a feature, with all his heart. but a. is never going to release more of a game than some prototype code, with no gameplay and lacking everything a. does not find important, no matter how much he dreams about it. he says, he will add graphics and stuff later, but he won't. because for that he needs to think like b. worst case scenario: a. builds an engine, and leaves the company. a team of b. starts to extend the engine and build a game on it, but hits the limits; they hire another a., a2 and this a2 has to rewrite all code from a1, either because he just can't help himself, or b. now really needs a different solution by now.

    there is c. that is an a-type of guy, who learns by working that b is right if it comes to creating a product, or a b-type of guy who works hard to learn certain stuff and becomes an expert so he can do the same as a.
    It is a good day, when you arrive at c. It means, you don't just have some "insight and experience", but actually, you had some personal wins and losses and started to see the world around you, and learned patience and respect. Good luck.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. megapro Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    72
    Don't worry 30-50 km diameter is more than enough to make it appear perfectly flat when you're on the planet. I'm currently playing on this 2km diameter planetoid http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=418423268 and it's allready flat enough for most stations i've build. Especially with the new feature that allows us to place station blocks out of the 3 axis grid you can align it pretty well.
     
  8. TEOTWAWKI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    571
    Yep, we know that, we simply believe that things like "deathmatch scenarios" and "capture the flag" and... *sighs* ..."space races" are infinitely less important than the myriad of long standing issues and core features that need attention. There are enough mission critical projects to keep Keen busy without implementing features that benefit a portion of the community... well... almost benefit a portion of the community. We all need new netcode before some of the new features will benefit anyone.

    Some of the issues/features were not worked on. There are more issues than Keen employees, so it is reasonable to assume that some important work was left for another time while scenarios and the related editor were being implemented, and many of us find that frustrating.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  9. tharkus Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    712
    Wow 7 pages of fight ... well ,i´ve said my opinion (2nd page)
    but dont understand the need to step / trample on others opinions that i see in some people.
    if the devs are doing what they are doing i guess they have a reason, im not saying im completely
    100% ok with this , i expected comunity + devs bugfixes in this update but well, take it easy.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. wd56 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    147
    I think people are just getting frustrated with the game and where its headed.

    Multiplayer has always had multitude of issues, I know that since I purchased the game last year in October, it hasnt really improved. Now they are releasing items for multiplayer as new updates, however even if one wanted to use them, thanks to the lag and whatnot no one can. So what is the point of these updates. That is the issue, I believe, people are having.

    There are always keen i hate you and keen can i be your slave posts every update, which are generally the minority. However, since last weeks update and this update its been constant fights (starting to look like 4chan here) because people have probably reached a tipping point and dont quite understand the point of these multiplayer new feature updates, when you cant feasibly use them.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Taerarenai Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    19
    Well i dont like this update (neither did i like the last one), but the difference between this and the last one is that this update might actually be worth something (not for me tho) so good job on that part....but.....(there's always a but)...where are the fixes ???? Seriously, no fixes???
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. piddlefoot. Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    161
    Welcome to SE people !

    Where building and lag go hand in hand !

    I didn't mind this update, it gives people the opportunity to put in crude AI to fight against with a few people on both teams, better than the last update anyway, but not by much.

    KEEN, focus on the dozens and dozens of posts your getting about the games core performance.
    Its far more important than you seem to realise.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    Software programming is too complex for people to scream "OMG no fixes!!!!" ALL the time. Sure, they might be entitled to it since they paid for the game, but their pestering in complete ignorance is insulting. Luckily, these devs are some cool dudes, and keep up their work despite all the crap they have to endure. Sure, I might never use the Space Race scenario, so it's no good for me, but it might be for others. And besides, are you aware of all the work being done? They're not focused on small updates.

    I have taken some good looks at the Source Code updates in recent weeks, and it's definitely not halted. You might not need scenarios but, would you prefer programmers to sit on their hands? "They should fix bugs!" you might tell me. Well, surprise! They are indeed fixing stuff and working on pending stuff as well. Thing is, the code is no easy read for me (it's really complicated, it's not UE4 where you can program behaviours just by linking boxes in a GUI), and I think it's not that easy for them either, so stuff takes time. I'm sure every programmer there works on something at any given time. However, not all features or fixes take just one week to finish, and when all priority tasks are covered, then the space is filled with stuff that can be finished quicker and still fits some purpose within the game, so you get your weekly update (new toys), which is quite remarkable.

    But you can't force them to work on fixes when they probably already have like 5 people looking at exactly the same stuff, just to fix mofing big problems. Integrating community fixes is no easy task either, when you have to make sure that the merges don't break anything with the internal code base, which they can easily done if the differential is not properly executed. But, not to worry. Netcode is being worked on, because Raknet's been referenced in the source for a while; planets are definitely being worked on: after customizing the spawn dialog, I managed to place a planet with an atmosphere which can be seen offworld, but not inside due to a LOD bug, since Github is quite behind the current internal development base, although they already feature oxygen and gravity, and it pulls stuff (blocks, characters, debris) down, which is quite cool to watch...

    In short, NOTHING has been set aside, but stuff can't come out when you desire it the most, it comes out when it's done. Unless you can take a dump whenever and as many times in a day as you want to, in which case, go ahead and complain of our inferiority, Supermans. :D

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. TEOTWAWKI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    571
    Of course not. I would prefer they tackle the myriad of issues that have been left fallow while "Call of Duty in Space" was developed. I would much prefer to see existing bugs, glitches, and issues fixed. I would much prefer mining receive some more attention. Pistons and rotors need work. You said it yourself, it is no easy task integrating community fixes without breaking internal code, that in and of itself is a great reason to keep people focused on the task at hand. There are plenty of issues to keep staff busy without adding features that belong at the end of the development schedule. I would really love to see Keen clear their plate before going back to the buffet. It can't be all steak and cake. You gotta eat the vegetables too.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. honya15 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    22
    NO! JUST NO!
    It is an early access game, they do it right to first make functions they want in the final game, then, after everything has been completed, fix the bugs and optimize. I've seen games what done the other way, and it was horrible. E.g. check Life is Feudal. In like 1 year, they did ONCE content patch. The game is basically the same as it was 1 year ago, just more optimized, less crash. So pretty much no reason to play, because it is unbalanced, hard to play, and like 30% of the functions work. Really interesting...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Taerarenai Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    19
    You might wanna make sure that whoever youre referring to has no knowledge of programming. I suppose you posted that for me, not specifically tho (given the fact thats after my message) , well for your information ive been programming since 2005 and i know how hard it is, BUT instead of adding new features i always fixed whatever was broken (or the most broken). What they are doing right now is pushing every little feature they have in mind and they will fix the game at a later date after theyve added everything they wanted. While thats not a bad idea for them (its easier to just focus on fixing everything instead of fixing + adding features), its not good for us given the multiplayer problems, building bugs etc. Like hell, isnt this a building game ? Ive seen people reporting that they cant build properly after this update....

    Its no use adding features (even if its early access) if we cant play properly...
     
  17. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    Not a bad point, but again, you haven't even grasped mine, because you keep presuming the devs are not trying to fix stuff, and that it is feasible to assign 20 people to fix bugs which are distributed around lots of places in the codebase, which makes for a very complicated effort to coordinate. Whatever the errors in the past that lead to the problems in the present, they have to move forward and work the best they can.


    Well, actually I wasn't talking just about you, but rather, everyone, seeing how many hard-headed complaints I'm seeing all around.
    But, if you insist.......

    You say you've been programming like for 10 years. Pro or amateur? Distributed or centralized? Apps or Web? Supervised or free-flow? Because all that makes quite a difference in perception of complex projects and their workflows. It's one thing to know to code, difficult in itself, and other thing is to actually work production environments with millions of clients, and even more, to have commanded your own team of programmers (because no matter how good a programmer, people don't necessarily have vision to manage a project).

    See, you build something up from the ground as best as you can, with small initial resources, so there's bound to be mistakes, no one is perfect. Time goes on, and then comes a point where you have a big codebase, and also a big community checking out your every move. When you have lots of people looking at you, you see yourself in the (logical) predicament of providing better user experience, summed in 2 points: stability and content. And here's the tricky thing, having exponentially outgrown the original project, and at the same time, multiplied your clients, you have to balance things. And this being an early access, a minimal archievement has been made, which is basic stability. Sure, pistons and rotors might be broken in MP, but not so much in SP.

    But reality is that, the majority of the game works as expected, within some constraints of course. Then, what, should they hunt flies with bazookas, which would stall content and innovation, maybe creating even bigger bugs in the process and increase the complaints? Or do they move everything in parallel so that progress does not strain and HR is better allocated for max productivity? In the case of this game, the later is much more logical. And critical bugs (those who break primary functionality) will still get topmost priority.

    Cheers
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,367
    See, as expected the initial argument is "planets are in space, soooo...." That's a grammatical argument. You know darn well what the difference is. If you don't, just get in your car and drive to the ISS. Oh, wait...

    No. that's aerospace engineering. unless the planet has no gravity or atmosphere. Sort of like what SE has already.

    Well first, it's not me. Second, I'm not the one that thinks space engineering is boring. Most players have simply not seen the potential. Look at what people build. Ships are all sleek and aerodynamic. Why? because that's what we are familiar with. Real spacecraft don't need to be like that. You grew up with a concept of up and down, neither of which exists in space. So, we get artificial gravity so that people will be more comfortable. There's no artificial gravity on the ISS and the astronauts seem to be ok with it.

    The only amazing thing would be pulling it off with the current engine. What they are telling us we're going to get, given the limitations of said engine, are not even technically planets, and even with their small size the speed limitation throws out the orbital mechanics. In other words a lot has be be faked. Way too much.

    You think Nautical Engineers would be boring? You think Aerospace Engineers would be boring? I guess so because you think Space Engineers is boring.

    The sandbox is the SE sandbox, the possibilities are already endless, and there is already no sanbox out there like it (and, of course, the game's not finished yet). I'm not entirely sure where the "extra" comes from, except for the planets themselves.

    I'm not worried about the game being half-assed. It's the planets that will be half-assed. It's the planets that deserve better treatment. The game itself is just fine. As far as space engineering goes it's nearly perfect. However, you throw planets into the mix with fake orbital and aerodynamic mechanics, the game will become planet-centric for most players and the real ingenious space engineering will take much, much longer to come to fruition.

    Look, I don't want to clog up the change log. This is and has been discussed at length here. If planets was easy we'd already have them. Just make a big asteroid and put some trees on it. Obviously there's more to it. Using SE's engine to get it done is like using a machine gun to chop down a tree. Sure, you can do it but, dude, the chain saw is right there.
     
  19. Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,890
    Mix-martes...

    What we are experience here is a case of the feature-creeps. It's when dev teams get caught up in the "you know what would be cool if we did this next?" scenario. These aren't features that were planned in a design document, but generally spirited additions to existing code to make the software just that little bit better.

    Which leads to a fundamental problem... no code is ever perfect. Every feature that you add is an opportunity for more bugs to exist. It's an opportunity to create more complex and cascading problems.

    This then becomes a nightmare to QA or QC. How do you test functionality against the design document when there really isn't any? So basically what happens is the software gets too large and unmanageable and TOO COSTLY to fix. The project is either scrapped or you just start over basically using the mess of coding ideas that doesn't work probably as a source of ideas to rework a design document and rebuild from scratch.

    I've seen it happen when I was a freshly minted product manager back in 2001. Our software was built by a "genius" independent developer then a bunch of devs were hired to implement new features into it. What was once a streaming media encoder for web-cam girls to chat with was not a file encoder, feature laden live media streaming app, and a live support app with the ability to push HTML data to the user. What it REALLY was... was a big stinking mess of crashing apps and Dr. Watson errors that just didn't work. There was no structure to the code... just a bunch of people hacking in more features and creating more bugs. Our QA team was on the verge of rioting. Management just wanted a product to sell (push out the door) so we released code that wasn't even tested. (sound familiar)

    In the end there was a mutiny and someone even pulled a knife on an audio DSP dev for wearing a microsoft shirt in a Linux HOOOOOUSE! Sure he was only representing his set... but I do digress.

    We started from scratch with a REAL SDK. Then we rebuilt ALL of our software from that SDK... ONCE THE SDK was thoroughly tested and validated.

    The CORE of our software was functional and optimized. The applications we needed to develop then rolled out like a breeze and QA abandoned their seize engines and got back to work.

    Feature creep time is over. Daydreaming in code should end. Get the product optimized and in condition to be released. Then go back to adding in features until you feel that this "alpha" is at a point where an official release is due.

    But with a million copies sold... why bother? Keep the game in alpha forever and then just abandon it when sales drop off. You can keep adding meaningless features if there is no end goal, release date, or milestones. The more I hear about Miner Wars the more I see a pattern.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  20. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,367
    I'm sure Keen understands that these things they are releasing that are clearly for MP are not going to be of much use given the state of MP. However, just because they're useless for MP doesn't mean they can't be used. There are a lot of useless things in the game (wheels), yet they exist and people use them. Keen's style has always been to give us stuff when it's ready enough, not necessarily when it's finished. At some point it'll all come together, but that point is very, very far away.

    Some people are saying "they are giving us small stuff, so something big must be coming." No. Just more small stuff. We're getting the small stuff because the small stuff is ready. That's it. They're not holding anything back. The MP team is busy every day endeavoring to make MP ready (but not finished, because the game is still alpha). When it does come out it will just barely work. Then there will be weeks and weeks of updates, hotfixes, bugfixes and patches.

    The angst comes from expecting what's not likely. What's not likely is MP and planets being ready soon.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Irish286 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    134
    It's not that we think Y isn't being worked on It's that Y has been being worked on for over a year now and we're tired of waiting.
     
  22. Stardriver907 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    3,367
    Waiting is pretty much what happens with alpha games. I'm not aware of one game on the scale of SE that was done quickly. Not because it hasn't been done, but because every single one of them was crap.

    I'm curious what people that make comments like these really expect for what they actually paid. I paid six US Dollars for this game a year ago. I didn't make the decision lightly. I watch Twitch for several months. Found out about these forums and started reading. I was actually prepared to pay more when the game went on sale. Even then I expected far less than what I have today.

    If you are tired of waiting now, just think how tired you're going to be a year from now, because the game still won't be "ready" by then. I keep hearing about "games like SE" that are "about ready". You could buy one of those and be done with it. There is no reason to wait. Keen won't mind. Really, it's ok.

    You can get a hamburger from McDonald's in less than five minutes. It was cooked by a machine attended by a kid wishing he was somewhere else. Or, you can get a hamburger from a real restaurant cooked by real people that care if you like it. They're both hamburgers. Only one makes you wait. Which one will taste better?
     
  23. leewells2000 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    236
    I must say I'm very happy that Emperyon is coming out in July. I've kinda lost hope that SE will do much more beyond flounder as it seems the devs audience focus is primarily on single-player/co-op and not DS while ignoring the primary needs of that audience (more content such as planets).
     
  24. zDeveloper10 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    742
    wow just looked it up to see what the fuss is about- it looks almost exactly like SE
     
  25. TEOTWAWKI Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    571
    I have grasped your point. And I am not presuming that devs are not trying to fix stuff. What I am presuming is that there are more bugs, features, and content already to keep the entire SE staff busy without implementing new features which will only benefit a subset of the overall community... except that netcode isn't finished so it's relatively pointless right now anyway. Between work with planets, the myriad of bugs and glitches, the need to audit community contributions, DX11 assets, problems with pistons/rotors/etc, all the work on scenarios seems a bit premature. Of course, we're talking about the tedious work that's being avoided, new features are always fun to develop.
     
  26. ArgumentNullException Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    32
    It has all been said and it is all ignored all around.

    le sigh..... This, I suppose will be the case time and again with these games. The lauded KSP even went through this phase long before it was on Steam (after about the same number of months of development too). Its like deja-vu but with more screamers due to the higher exposure.
     
  27. DOOOOOOOMMM! Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    35
    I'm having a lot of fun making my ship indestructible and crashing in to cargo ship! :p
     
  28. zDeveloper10 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    742
    from what I've seen the KSP people seem generally pleasant. though,I do not know if they've always been that way,lol
     
  29. Irish286 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    134
    If SE doesn't have the netcode fix by next year I'll probably have deleted the game and thrown it in my crap tab on Steam and added Keen to my never trust this developer list.
     
  30. ArgumentNullException Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    32
    There was a long phase around year 2 of development prior to going on steam where there was pretty regular bitching about nearly every update and bitching every day in between. If it wasn't an argument about update frequency it was constant back seat team leading by people who don't develop software or think that the way they develop software is the best and the devs are fools for not doing it exactly as they think it should be done.

    Everyone started getting a lot nicer when the game moved into beta and they began fixing bugs in earnest 0.22+.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.