It doesn't work "as intended." According to the release that started this thread, the "intermittent passive AI" is the main target right now, which means to CA at least, this is dysfunctional behavior, and requires fixing. Many things work right, but that one (at least) does not. And that's not even counting the fact that you have to reinstall the game to 1.0 to use the leaked patch. You could write that off as unimportant, but in reality it's a pain in the butt, and in itself warrants them pausing to remedy it.Originally Posted by sbroadbent
As for more patching... I'm sure we've been over this ground before, but for your benefit sbroadbent I'll list reasons not to update more frequently:
1. Doing so invariably means users are running vastly different versions of the game, as many are too lazy to constantly update. This in turn causes confusion, the persistent reporting of old already fixed bugs, and can cause multiplayer compatibility issues as well.
2. Frequent releases waste the developer's time. The more they issue patches, the more time they must spend packing them up, making sure they install correctly, and all of that jazz that isn't simply writing code. Not only is it inefficient to do that step more often than necessary... but it also makes the rest of the process less efficient. Each patch becomes undefined, including whatever happens to get fixed from time A to time B. This means the team doesn't know what's in the patch until it goes out the door, and must spend time figuring out what they're supposed to be doing more often since the patch is so fluid. Also, it's disrupting to release often: generally developers can get in a groove if they're working in the same direction for a while, and will usually remember right where to pick up again next time. Constant releases distract from that continuity of the development process.
3. Cost. One main reason this isn't often done is that it requires huge amounts more testing than a few larger patches do. That testing costs a lot of money. Testing is required for every update that goes out the door, because any one of them being messed up like the 1.2 patch is would cause a big problem. So more releases = more testing = more money, which means companies will try hard not to do it.
4. Less updates means they tend to make bigger splashes each time there is one. Look how hyped people are for 1.2. If these fixes had come out instead in 10 smaller patches, hardly anyone would be raving about how much work the dev team was doing to patch the game. In fact most of us might not even realize the patches were fixing noticeable things, we'd be likely to just take them for granted. Along the same lines, big updates get noticed by other gaming entities as well. The 1.2 update for M2TW is likely to be packaged with notable gaming magazines, and hosted on a myriad of sites due to its perceived importance to the game. Smaller patches are perceived as less important, and so would never rate that sort of special treatment.
There's probably more, but it's getting a lil late here and I'm running out of steam, so I'm going to call it quits. That should be more than enough info for everyone to chew on. Besides, four points is plenty enough for one post![]()
Bookmarks