Unofficial BTS 3.13 patch

[oedali]

Thanks, Bhruic! Can't wait to try it out.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I would think in OCC you Should have the option to Liberate a city on your troops entering it... after all if you liberate it, you never actually have it... the only thing an OCC prevents you from doing is controlling another city.

Of course I wouldn't quite call it a bug, I'd leave it for an imaginary Official patch

 

[77alex77]

Thanks, Bhruic, for fixing this so quickly!
I tried my save again and I didn't notice any difference between 1.09 and 1.101.
I have to add, that my System is about six years old...
So you got it, I think.

alex

 

[Bhruic]

Verily! And the speed with which the issue produced by the useful fix to the workers was truly impressive ...

I'm sure if I worked for Firaxis, someone would be complaining that I released a buggy, untested patch and then used the end users as beta testers.

Bh

 

[PRSDNT]

I'm sure if I worked for Firaxis, someone would be complaining that I released a buggy, untested patch and then used the end users as beta testers.

Bh

Do you think so?

 

[Quagga]

That's the difference between being a paid professional and a volunteer.

 

[Nishdog]

I'm sure if I worked for Firaxis, someone would be complaining that I released a buggy, untested patch and then used the end users as beta testers.

Bh

You can't please all the people all the time...and there are some you can never please...

Thanks for the patches...

 

[theKurgen]

Bhruic has the distinct advantage in that unlike Firaxis, his testers are actually conscious while they play the game

 

[Smidlee]

I'm sure if I worked for Firaxis, someone would be complaining that I released a buggy, untested patch and then used the end users as beta testers.

Bh

Yet for all I know you could be Alexman under a different name who like to see BTS fixed as much as the rest of us.

 

[Aquatic]

I'm sure if I worked for Firaxis, someone would be complaining that I released a buggy, untested patch and then used the end users as beta testers.

Bh

True enough, but quite apart from the issue of being paid to do a job, I don't suppose Firaxis have either quite the same relationship with the users that you do (at least we feel included in your work!) or anything like the same speed of response to the problem. Perhaps we ought to cut Firaxis some slack, but I suspect they could perhaps learn just a few tips from your way of operating.

 

[Wodan]

I said this last week and still feel this way, but I really think we have the best of both worlds. Sure, Take2/Firaxis could improve. But, whether having Solver/Bhruic do the "unofficial" patches was a part of some planned master scheme or not, the way it has come about we are getting as close to instant gratification as we probably could hope for, plus the eventual official sanction which by its very nature takes more time.

Wodan

 

[Roland Johansen]

I said this last week and still feel this way, but I really think we have the best of both worlds. Sure, Take2/Firaxis could improve. But, whether having Solver/Bhruic do the "unofficial" patches was a part of some planned master scheme or not, the way it has come about we are getting as close to instant gratification as we probably could hope for, plus the eventual official sanction which by its very nature takes more time.

Wodan

Agreed.

I wonder if game developers have ever thought about anonymously patching the game while having the advantage of direct testing by unpaid customers and no bureaucratic overhead. There would be many advantages. If a bug is too hard to fix, then no-one will complain against one of the players willing enough to try to patch the game. If a mistake is made during patching then no-one will complain against a player willing enough to try to patch the game. As long as you're anonymous, no one will complain about certain missing game features or certain game rules as you're just one of the players.

The main disadvantage is that you don't have the authority to make radical changes because you're just one of the players and not Firaxis. But still, there are many advantages.

It's probably too risky to do for a gaming company because it might lead to some negative press if someone were to find out that one of the players who was unofficially patching the game was actually working for Firaxis.

By the way, I don't think you're working for Firaxis, Bhruic, although you're clearly qualified to do so. Good job with the patching!

 

[Bhruic]

I wonder if game developers have ever thought about anonymously patching the game while having the advantage of direct testing by unpaid customers and no bureaucratic overhead. There would be many advantages. If a bug is too hard to fix, then no-one will complain against one of the players willing enough to try to patch the game. If a mistake is made during patching then no-one will complain against a player willing enough to try to patch the game. As long as you're anonymous, no one will complain about certain missing game features or certain game rules as you're just one of the players.

It's an idea - I know that some developers have supported a product in an "unofficial" capacity on other games (the defunk Troika developers with Vampire the Masquerade springs to mind). Other companies have been known to publish beta patches with a 'patch at your own risk' warning.

The main problem, however (and an area where Firaxis deserves some serious kudos) is that most games don't offload core game rules to a dll. That means that any patching modifies the executable, which is a big "no-no" in today's "let's bog down every executable with craploads of copy-protection" world.

The main disadvantage is that you don't have the authority to make radical changes because you're just one of the players and not Firaxis. But still, there are many advantages.

Is that really a problem? I mean, I know that some people have enjoined me not to make major changes because it's an "unofficial" patch. But there's nothing preventing me from doing so - it's just a matter of how much acceptance such a patch would have.

Which brings me into the other downside... End user acceptance of "unofficial" patches. Mine has a little under 6000 downloads here at the time of this post, and that encompasses multiple versions. Probably about 1/10th that on Apolyton. But let's be generous, and round it to 7000. I can't help but believe that's an incredibly small fraction of the people using 3.13.

It's probably too risky to do for a gaming company because it might lead to some negative press if someone were to find out that one of the players who was unofficially patching the game was actually working for Firaxis.

You think so? If I were to indicate that I worked for Firaxis (I don't, but hypothetically), would people be more likely to react negatively or positively? My expectation is that while a few would be negative (some always are), the majority would probably be happy to see someone from Firaxis doing something, if only in an unofficial capacity.

By the way, I don't think you're working for Firaxis, Bhruic, although you're clearly qualified to do so.

No, of course not, I obviously work for Quicksilver.

I don't work for Quicksilver, that's an "in joke" for the people who followed my Master of Orion 3 patching

Bh

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I do think "official beta" patches (from firaxis) would be preferable. However the advantage Bhuric has is that he is very familiar with Playing the game, and so doesn't have to go and consult with the designers every time a change is made.

 

[Roland Johansen]

It's an idea - I know that some developers have supported a product in an "unofficial" capacity on other games (the defunk Troika developers with Vampire the Masquerade springs to mind). Other companies have been known to publish beta patches with a 'patch at your own risk' warning.

The main problem, however (and an area where Firaxis deserves some serious kudos) is that most games don't offload core game rules to a dll. That means that any patching modifies the executable, which is a big "no-no" in today's "let's bog down every executable with craploads of copy-protection" world.

I'm not so familiar with those other games. I do agree that the modability of this game allows the unofficial patching. It's a great feature of this game. I hope that Firaxis will continue along this path for civ 5 and on.

Is that really a problem? I mean, I know that some people have enjoined me not to make major changes because it's an "unofficial" patch. But there's nothing preventing me from doing so - it's just a matter of how much acceptance such a patch would have.

Which brings me into the other downside... End user acceptance of "unofficial" patches. Mine has a little under 6000 downloads here at the time of this post, and that encompasses multiple versions. Probably about 1/10th that on Apolyton. But let's be generous, and round it to 7000. I can't help but believe that's an incredibly small fraction of the people using 3.13.

The major reason that your unofficial patch is not downloaded by 100.000 or more people is because most civ players are not fanatics and don't join an online community. And also among those who are lurking or irregularly posting on this site, there are many who are unfamiliar with your unofficial patch. I just mentioned your unofficial patch to someone who posted in the quick answers / newbie questions thread and asked about something weird (the AI trading bug where the AI is trading for already owned resources). He/she probably didn't check the stickied threads in this forum and you can't expect every lurker/irregular poster to do that. And then there are those who don't know enough about computers to install an unofficial patch. That might sound strange to someone who easily digs into the code of a game, but there are many who can just install a game but never try to install a mod because it might break something.

Still, the 7000 of us are grateful for the unofficial patch and you probably helped some of the most fanatical civ players. You've improved thousands and thousands of hours of gameplay of this player group.

You think so? If I were to indicate that I worked for Firaxis (I don't, but hypothetically), would people be more likely to react negatively or positively? My expectation is that while a few would be negative (some always are), the majority would probably be happy to see someone from Firaxis doing something, if only in an unofficial capacity.

There would be quite some positive reactions by players who really like the direct communication with Firaxis (me included). But there would also be those who would complain about missing features, buggy gameplay, all kinds of gameplay requests, adding units, adding features, all kinds of stuff. I might ask for some long wished gameplay additions myself, who knows. This thread is 36 pages now. Just add the length of the various poland, hitler and all the various request threads to that and I think you know what I mean. We might have lengthy discussions about ranged bombardment in this thread. (I've seen you posting on this subject, we agree on that.)

Even if you were a Firaxian, I think you would better work anonymously.

No, of course not, I obviously work for Quicksilver.

I don't work for Quicksilver, that's an "in joke" for the people who followed my Master of Orion 3 patching

I know that there was some unofficial patching of Orion 3, but I never played the game (did play Orion 1 and 2), so I missed the inside joke.
You probably did a great job there too and a similar suggestion was made as in the last few posts here.

 

[Bhruic]

Still, the 7000 of us are grateful for the unofficial patch and you probably helped some of the most fanatical civ players. You've improved thousands and thousands of hours of gameplay of this player group.

Oh, I won't posting the number as a personal negative. I'm just saying that an unofficial patch helps a lot less people than an official one does just by its very nature.

There would be quite some positive reactions by players who really like the direct communication with Firaxis (me included). But there would also be those who would complain about missing features, buggy gameplay, all kinds of gameplay requests, adding units, adding features, all kinds of stuff. I might ask for some long wished gameplay additions myself, who knows. This thread is 36 pages now. Just add the length of the various poland, hitler and all the various request threads to that and I think you know what I mean. We might have lengthy discussions about ranged bombardment in this thread. (I've seen you posting on this subject, we agree on that.)

That's all possible. But I think that would be an offshoot of the lack of communication that we've got at this point. If there were Firaxians who dropped by semi-regularily to discuss those sorts of issues, I don't think they'd come up so much in an unofficial patch thread. But it's hard to say for sure.

I know that there was some unofficial patching of Orion 3

Yeah, people complaining about the bugs with the last patch here would be horrified by the bugs with MoO3. I didn't really spend much time playing it, but I sure spent a lot of time fixing it. At least with Civ IV, I still play it, although not nearly as often as I used to.

Bh

 

[Minor Annoyance]

...
Yeah, people complaining about the bugs with the last patch here would be horrified by the bugs with MoO3. I didn't really spend much time playing it, but I sure spent a lot of time fixing it. At least with Civ IV, I still play it, although not nearly as often as I used to.

Bh

Yeah I probably spend about equal time between playing MoO3 and modding to fix it. I never even played the last version of the mod I made because it was when you started patching the game and fixed the visibility bug and a lot of other things and I didn't want to have mod previously non functioning things things back into the game. I did a lot of stuff with weapons, added new fighter weapons, turned spinal into a weapons mod instead of a mount, etc. but I never bothered to try them out. I still wonder if the spreadsheet I made to see the relative strength of weapons was accurate.

 

[Innocence]

I'm just saying that an unofficial patch helps a lot less people than an official one does just by its very nature.

True. Would it be possible for Firaxis to promote this player-made core-fix to their official download site, perhaps packed in a standard installer (for those who don't know how to copy files to a certain directory).

Has anyone proposed this to Firaxis?

While I'm here: Thanks for the unofficial patch Bhruic - it really does make for a more enjoyful game

 

[Ethric]

MoO 3... *shudder* You do great work patching here, Bhruic, but to hear you actually had the guts to try to fix MoO 3... wow at just figuring out where to start

 

[Aquatic]

I think that would be an offshoot of the lack of communication that we've got at this point. If there were Firaxians who dropped by semi-regularily to discuss those sorts of issues, I don't think they'd come up so much in an unofficial patch thread. But it's hard to say for sure.

All true. A little more communication would solve a lot of things. The funny thing is that it would very likely be good for Firaxis's business as well.