Truecombat Elite mod - 1 day to go

(WeeBull) #41

Me and EB just had a little game, I thought it was pretty good, but he had to whine about every little thing he could find. But that’s allowed if you spawn and you get stuck in the wall all the time!
I’ve played an earlier version a while back, but I don’t really see what changed apart from the maps, or is it just a map update?

(Obli) #42

The graphics have had a major overhaul. I can’t think what the features are off of the top of my head but a lot of work has been done with the graphics - the difference is a great improvement and quite apparent to me. As a result, they had to redo all maps, pre-bake the textures (something to do with the ‘tone mapping’ or something).

They have added a freeclimb feature too so certain objects can be climbed up.

This mod is fun although gameplay is slow (but can be tense) on objective. Bodycount is like a team deathmatch and is much faster paced and good fun. I haven’t tried CTF.

EB: I know where you’re coming from. On the Snow map, on spawn I kept spawning too close to the wall and getting stuck… =\ Ah well, it’s still a beta, and a good one at that!

(EB) #43

I don’t complain in a bad way…it is a light hearted sarcasm.

.49 means about half way finished…then it should be decent when it is completely finished.
…I enjoyed playing the 2 maps I played even though I couldn’t spawn anywhere else except inside the wall. :stuck_out_tongue:

@Weebull, it’s not whining…it’s observations like “Hey modders, didn’t you notice this shite” ? …unless they planned on making people spawn in walls. In which case, good job!..& plan successful ! :stuck_out_tongue:
//===
See!? …light hearted sarcasm.

(ouroboro) #44

Yes, because that’s how the versioning system works. :rolleyes:

(Wils) #45

Hmm. That’s actually how I read “0.49”, too - about halfway to being finished in the developers’ eyes. What do you see it as?

(kamikazee) #46

For some mods I’d rather see it as “half as playable as it should be”. :smiley:

(ouroboro) #47

Maybe, if they’re choosing numbers arbitrarily.

(Wils) #48

You mean non-arbitrarily, I assume. I would argue that if they were choosing numbers arbitrarily, they’re not versioning their stuff properly (in that the entire point of giving something a version number is lost when it isn’t comparable to other version numbers in terms of progress).

(nUllSkillZ) #49

Side is on again:
http://www.truecombatelite.net/

(ouroboro) #50

If 0.5 (used for simplicity) is “half done”, then obviously 1.0 would be “done”. But what if 1.0 isn’t “done”? Conversely, what if 0.9 is “done”? There’s no guarantee that you will “finish” at 1.0, unless you get creative with your version numbers with the intent of having everything fall into place as such. Skipping or adding numbers in this manner would be arbitrary.

So, since “done” won’t necessarily coincide with 1.0, 0.5 isn’t necessarily “half done”.

(EB) #51

I see your point…but who is to say that whoever finishes a program with “v.9” shouldn’t just label it as “v1” … and along that same route of thought:

  • How would they know what changes to specifically choose to justify the depth of gain on the revision number ?
    For example: JohnSmith could take 100 steps to create a program, 50 large and 50 small. Would the 50 large steps make more difference(on the revision #) than the 50 small ?..and what if, to say, he chose to leave out 10 things due to those items being “frivalous”…therefore v1 would be v.9, BUT that v.9 would actually be v1.

Anyways…I am assuming that .49 is half-finished on their basis of the “TrueCombatElite” concept. I am hoping that is their “plan”…because I would actually play a few maps if I could spawn without being attached to a wall.

//=====
See !? …more light hearted sarcasm. :stuck_out_tongue:

(nUllSkillZ) #52

Nothing will ever get finished.
Could be one of Murphys laws.

(Wils) #53

I think we may disagree on what constitutes ‘done’, and the relevance of the general inability of any developers to hit targets versus their intent to do so.

As far as versioning goes, ‘done’ to me means ‘every feature we initially wanted to put in the game is in and working’. There may be bugs they haven’t managed to fix yet, but they are considered minor enough to release anyway. There may also be features that the developer now wants to add that weren’t in the original design, that aren’t major enough to warrant holding off the release. There are obviously also bugs and features the developer hasn’t come across or thought up at all yet.

Every developer I know of who uses a 0.00 -> 1.00 (or similar) versioning system tends to be working towards 1.0 as the final or finished product. How they define that is up to them. I don’t think it matters that some never reach that, and go from 0.9 to 0.999zz or whatever - they clearly intended 1.0 to be ‘done’, but can’t seem to bring themselves to tag any release as such. In the other camp, I would contend that any teams who rapidly reach 1.0 and continue on to 3.0 and beyond didn’t really have a firm design or schedule for their game/mod in the first place.

There are exceptions, such as mods going to ‘version 2!’ for PR reasons, and you often find internal versioning different to external (especially if the game or mod is built off a previous codebase).

Here’s what I consider a good versioning system. Your mileage may vary:

0.01 -> 1.00 - Initial design through to feature complete, stable release.
0.01 increments for important bug fixes only
0.1 increments for major new features/content
1.0 increments for those occasional complete rewrites from the ground up, including game assets and maps.

(ouroboro) #54

This is getting too deep. I regret opening my big mouth now, because I don’t actually care what number they use but now I feel obligated to make sure I’m understood. :stuck_out_tongue:

You and EB said 0.49 was “about half done.” That means 1.0 is “done.” I said 0.49 isn’t necessarily half done, because assuming you follow a logical progression of versioning as a program develops, you never know where you will end up by the time you feel it’s ready to release – unless ending up at some specific number is part of the goal. In that case, you would probably have to excercise some leeway to land on target. Wouldn’t it be preferable to adhere to a structured system like you outlined, rather than aiming for a “PR version?”

Even if you don’t tweak the pre-release version numbers but end up slapping “1.0” on it on release day anyway, regardless of the pre-release version you were at, then the 0.49 truly never meant anything.

(thewonderfulcar) #55

(Wils) #56

The problem there is you’re describing two different scenarios in one paragraph - one in which the versioning is arbitrary, and one in which ending up at some specific number is part of the goal. The former isn’t what I’d call a ‘logical progression of versioning’. The latter is best achieved with a schedule with criteria for each significant version, such that you only call it ‘version 0.50’ if it has, say, half the features you plan to put in. There are a bunch of ways of deciding you’d be halfway done at some point; the key factor is that you have decided what counts as halfway done, and you haven’t just got to 0.50 because it came after 0.49 and there were no numbers in between for you to use.

Yes, it would - not sure how this is relevant to anything. Ideally you set your criteria for each stage of the schedule, and you evaluate progress and adjust the remaining schedule accordingly.

If you’ve been versioning consistently with the intention that it should be representative of progress, then the 0.49 will always mean the point at which you considered your game or mod to be nearly halfway done. If it turns out you were wrong, so be it - you were wrong to call that version of your project 0.49, and misled players in the process. Shit happens :slight_smile:

(DG) #57

is there any significant difference between tcetest.zip and the .exe?*

I notice the readme talking about an installer, ok so hardly unusual to have no installer in a zip, but there’s no “dedicated launcher” either. Both I can happily live without, but upon trying to join I find pak3.pk3 is different to what’s on the servers. A 50meg download following on from 450mb I can also live without. Yes I got it via the official site, yes I tried reinstalling, but no, out here with the 512k I’m not going to try re-downloading without knowing that’s definately the solution.

I cant check what the .exe one is called since all their sites have fallen over again. On that subject, I’m non too impressed with their* idea, due to the site traffic causing problems for the other websites on their shared box, to only have it up when north american is online, i.e. when they’ll be busiest and causing maximum problems for the other sites :banana:

** I say their, but actually I’ve no idea who runs what out of truecombat.net, .us and .com, or why they arent all pointing to the same site.

(nUllSkillZ) #58

1st you have to de-install the old versions (or re-name the folder).
Than you can install the new version.
(Has been told in the IRC channel on release day.)

(DG) #59

yeah i junked the old install, still nobody likes my pak3.pk3 :frowning:

(=PoW= Kernel 2.6.5) #60

I’m playing the .49 version and I like it.

The textures look better and FINALLY the maps have been improved.
Not only in the way they look but in added routes to the objective/enemy.

My only complaint:
Freeclimb is not what I tought it would be.
If this mod is going for realism you should be able to climb EVERY fence.
Also drain pipes and crates.

I thought it was funny that you can climb up to a spot adjacent to a roof but not get onto the roof due to clip brushes (my guess).
This is done in all games so who am I to complain.