Rock Patch 1.10 development thread

[Renegade]

The way I see it the VKs revisions are no different from saying 1.05a, 1.05b, or 1.05c. They do not constitute a full version change. I know your argument for this is that he changed things that you consider new version worthy but he didnt.

He didnt but lets say he listed everything he had planned to accomplish with CE, and now everything appears to be working satisfactory. Since he listed his goals (once agian I know he didnt) of CE and now at the end of development they are done would you still insist that these changes you think are all so new version worth need new versions or do you let him call it CE?

Look at this thread for example he listed the main things he hoped to do in 1.10. Im sure (well up to this big fuss anyway) that we would see 1.10 revision #12, 1.10 revision #22, 1.10 revision #97. He will probably change a great many things not on that list, and also change things on his quest to complete 1.10 that are large and or major to the game. Does that mean where all this work is in the name of 1.10 on your list youer going to have it spand 3 different versions?

In all your ranting, you're missing an important point: I did not break on revisions. So far, I only increased the number when he changed the name: From 1.08 to 1.08 SE, from SE to CE, from CE to CE 74. In no situation I put a new version number in the middle of a release cycle.
In other words: It is no question that the release cycles begin/end where I put bold in the list. VK himself denoted them. The question is just whether I should map "real" version numbers to them, and, if yes, which version numbers.

(And to cut any lamers crying "But 1.08 SE is like 1.08b!!!" short:

1. What would that make 1.08 SE #0029? 1.08bb? 1.08c? It can't be c, it's still 1.08 SE, and 1.08 SE is like 1.08b, according to your logic? See the problem? Welcome to the world of VK's naming scheme.
   
2. Just because it's named "Second Edition" doesn't automatically mean it cannot be a standalone version. Think of Windows 98 SE. The differences to Win 98 were so grave that there was stuff that had 98 SE as a minimum requirement. So quit argumenting 1.08 SE must be 1.08 simply because it carries "1.08" in the title. By that logic, "1.10" is the second version released after "1.08". I don't know about you, but by my count, that doesn't quite work. Especially not if CE is not 1.09. But hey, VK's versioning scheme is "very clear and right", right?
   

)

Rockpatch isnt the only place where odd number/name systems systems pop up. Out side of the Windows example Decoder brought up Castlevania after 1,2,3 only uses names where Final Fantasy games use numbers if even in the case of X where X-2 used two sets, but all of the new Final Fantasy VII endevors are names with no numbers (Advent Children/Dirge of Cerberus/Before Crisis/Crisis Core). Mario 1,2,3,64 this could go on and on. Yet nobody has a problem keeping up.

I don't know much about FF, but let me tell you this: As an outsider, I shake my head whenever there's an announcement that "A new Final Fantasy VII" is gonna be released, when I know "Final Fantasy X" has been out for years. Just because a lot of people understand crap, that doesn't make it any less crap.
In addition, I was under the impression that Final Fantasy games are of different storylines on different platforms. So if only one series works for your platform anyway, and a game is only released every few years, it's not hard to keep up. Even an idiot could see that "The Final Fantasy VII released in 2006" is obviously older than "The Final Fantasy VII released in 2007".
Not to mention that Wikipedia seems to confirm my impression: The 2007 one is for PSP, while the 2006 one is for "Amp'd Mobile" and "Verizon", so it's probably a mobile phone game. There are two other FFVII mobile phone games, put none for the same "platform" - so, if there's only one exact game working for your platform, how can you get confused?
So...we have one FFVII for PSX, one for PSP, one for Verizon mobile phones, one for PS2, one for LG VX8000, LG VX8100, Audiovox 8940 and Samsung A890 mobile phones, and one for NTT DoCoMo i-Mode phones, Softbank Yahoo!Mobile phones and AU EZweb phones.
Now how the hell am I supposed to get confused if I had a PS2? There is only one FFVII for PS2! And if there were more, I'd only have to differ between "the one from 2006" and "the current one".
Compare that to RP:

• Celebration Edition Half Hundred
  
• Celebration Edition #0033
  
• 1.08 SE #0029
  

They're all for the same platform, for the same game, for the same patch version of that game. Now if you hadn't followed RP development, and RP:Versions wasn't up, how would you instinctively decide which one is the latest, or whether the latest one was even listed?

It's impossible, unless you either have a guide, or research by going through RockPatch News and check which thread was started last.

And I wrote that guide. Nothing more. One quick glance, and you can tell "Half Hundred" is the latest of those listed, but not the most recent one. Without having to keep up, without having to research. One glance. But noooooo, RockPatch:Version is teh evil and must go or VK won't continue. Because his versioning is sooooo much better.


P.S.: Same goes for Mario, btw: Mario 64 obviously was for Nintendo 64, so it was the only one you had to care about, and if you had an SNES, they were clearly numbered 1, 2, and 3, and the Nintendo 64 - Mario 64 connection was clear enough to not make you think you could play that. Can you say the same of CE 74? Do you automatically, instinctively know that the "74" does not refer to the revision ("CE #0051 - CE 74...hmm...must be build 74"), but to the Whiteboy Bug?
I think not.

VK, Please try to work on canpassive aquire tag on aircrafttypes so that it can automatically target other aircraft within its sights. AACombat tag on 1.08SE is great but it will be better if it automatically targets and seks out enemy aircraft.

Wishes → Wishlist, and you're rudely interrupting an important discussion.

Edit: Damn, Nighthawk beat me to it