Who wants a stable release? [Archive] - Armageddon Games Forums

Freedom

06-24-2007, 11:25 PM

At DarkDragons request.

Who wants a stable release of Zelda Classic over everything else at this time, so quest builders can once again build their quests for players to play?

Who wants the Quest database fixed as absolutely as soon as possible to host those new quests on?

Right now there isn't a good solid version to build with nor a place that will host those quests, since the database has been down here for over a year, and PureZC won't host "beta" version quests (although 183 and 2.10 were both betas, go figure)

IF you believe these are the two most important things facing Zelda Classic right now, please add your name below.

If very few do, then those of us who think this is the most important thing to be considered, will know it's time to move on and we'll STFU about it once and for all.

Hows that DarkDragon?

PLAYERS RING IN TOO, this effects you as well.

Majora

06-24-2007, 11:38 PM

Yes I want a stable release, but 254 is (IMO) good for now (for me at least), so I won't make a scene.

DarkDragon

06-24-2007, 11:38 PM

I would prefer more concrete suggestions of what we could do better; I'm sure no developer thinks to himself, "let's keep ZC as buggy as possible for as long as possible." Previous discussions have led to changes such as public beta testing, public alpha builds, and the public changelog.

Above all I don't want anyone to believe they are not being allowed to voice their concerns.

Freedom

06-24-2007, 11:48 PM

Those "concrete suggestions" were already discussed back when Jman was still here and before L was brought in, and it was decided then that nothing new would be added and what was there would be fixed and released.
That never happened, so now you want to do that again?

I'm talking stop adding, anything incomplete be coded out, bugs fixed, stable version released now.

Shazza Dani

06-24-2007, 11:54 PM

I'm talking stop adding, anything incomplete be coded out, bugs fixed, stable version released now.

Yes! *agrees*

_L_

06-24-2007, 11:54 PM

Yes I want a stable release, but 254 is (IMO) good for now (for me at least), so I won't make a scene.

But isn't build 403 technically less buggy? Simply by virtue of having less bugs?

The_Amaster

06-24-2007, 11:58 PM

I would like to point out that based on the changelog, almost all efforts have been devoted to bug fixing, and the new features are all pretty non-radical, buggy things. I think were headed in a good direction. Good to see you back too, Freedom, even if it is only for this.

SpykStorm

06-25-2007, 12:03 AM

I want a stable release, I also want the QDB back as soon as possible!
I saw a post at PZC about fixing the bugs and then adding new features.....

Edit; I aggree with Freedom

Freedom

06-25-2007, 12:07 AM

Good to see you back too, Freedom, even if it is only for this.

Thanks, but I wish it was to answer questions for the quests that I SHOULD have released that now set in my computer screwed up by these new builds.
I just want a no bullshit answer this time if we are EVER going to see a decent release or not so I know whether to just delete all this crap out of my computer and give up on it or not.

It just keeps going on month after month year after year, time for somebody to shit or get off the pot and quit torturing those of us that just want to build and release quests.

EDIT TO ADD;

Personally I can not understand why this all hasn't been done in steps.
Get a stable engine - release it
Add a feature, get it stable - release it
Add a feature, get it stable - release it

Why does it have to go month after month, year after year, with one buggy version after another?
Developers....
Enlighten me.

DarkDragon

06-25-2007, 12:38 AM

When custom item editing was added, a *huge* portion of the game logic had to be gutted and rewritten; it could be argued that most development since then has been the "get it stable" step after that feature (with some breaks for scripting and enemy editing, both of which are quite stable.)

Why exactly is the current build "unstable"? If you go to the bug forum, you can categorize bugs roughly as follows:

Small NES compatibility quirks, often very old (many)
Unforeseen consequences of earlier bugfixing (several)
Unfinished/broken features that have never fully worked (several, often involving Z3 animation)
Bugs with item properties (several, but now tailing off)
Bugs from new features (few)

Actually critical bugs - ZC crashing or corrupting quests - are not the ones that linger for months.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 12:46 AM

When custom item editing was added, a *huge* portion of the game logic had to be gutted and rewritten; it could be argued that most development since then has been the "get it stable" step after that feature (with some breaks for scripting and enemy editing, both of which are quite stable.)

You mean one of those features that was added AFTER it was understood that you all would be working on a stable version and not adding any more features until a stable version was released. :naughty:
month after month, year after year.
I'm still not enlightened.

I wonder....
Have you looked at the quest announcement discussion forum lately?
It's like a ghost town compared to what it used to be.

DarkDragon

06-25-2007, 12:55 AM

I don't know; I was out of the country and so do not feel informed enough to comment.

In any case, no major features have been added in recent months, and many many bugs have been fixed, so I would have thought you'd consider things to be finally moving in the right direction.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 01:00 AM

That's like saying every day brings us closer to the return of Jesus Christ, or for you atheists our death from global warming, so does that mean I should not be able to contain my excitement in the hope that it might happen someday?

I've been waiting for a decent version since about a week after 2.10 was released, how much more patient do you suggest I be?
Worked hard, in vain, beta testing to try and see that dream.
What now?

DarkDragon

06-25-2007, 01:24 AM

Gleeok

06-25-2007, 04:37 AM

Yes I want a stable release, but 254 is (IMO) good for now (for me at least), so I won't make a scene.

Dude, are you living under a rock? 364 is far better, and although I haven't messed with the newer ones much, 403 seems very stable from what i've seen. Look at the changelog.

The fact that most of the new bug threads recently have been NES compatability issues and minor annoyances, does lead me to believe a stable version is not far off. Progress is definately being made, no matter how you look at it. As for the new stuff we got an item editor, subscreen editor, enemy editor, and string editor, along with Zscript and some other stuff. Its kinda late to turn back now. If progress were to stop and a stable version with some incomplete features was released, how far back would this set 2.5? Why not shoot for an exceptionally stable b18? I wouldn't mind spending some extra time bugtesting to see a stable beta myself. So I guess i'm wondering; how long a time table are we talking about here, in either case? -yes I realize this question is almost rhetorical in nature.

I know that 2.5 was supposedly supposed to be released last year, but living in the past doesn't help matters. What we need is everyone working together for the good of all mankind...for the future. :cool: <sorry bout that, i can't resist> ;p

Seriously though. ;)

DarkDragon

06-25-2007, 05:26 AM

Why not shoot for an exceptionally stable b18?

This was actually my plan: fix bugs until no new reports are filed for a week or so, then call that build b18. Then some new testers came along and found NES compatibility bugs that everybody else had completely forgotten about (keep up the good work, by the way), which set the plan back by a bit. ;)

Nicholas Steel

06-25-2007, 06:25 AM

If progress were to stop and a stable version with some incomplete features was released, how far back would this set 2.5? Why not shoot for an exceptionally stable b18?

if anything it would alleviate the stress of waiting for 2.5 because people would be able to actualy make quests for once, thus no one would care how much it sets 2.5 back because 2.5 is everything that everyone suggests thus the chances of it being completed is not that great..

if a stable version was made a.k.a 2.10.3 (which does not exist yet >.>) then would freedom complain? NO !

would anyone have a right to complain about 2.5 progress? NO !

does anyone at the moment have a right to complain about the progress of 2.5? NO !

at the moment is there more of a reason to complain about the progress of 2.5? YES !

would making a stable version ASAP alleviate the pressure on making a stable 2.5? YES !
---

i think this is what i mean to say.

AmazingAmpharos

06-25-2007, 06:45 AM

As I've seen it, the change log has been a massively positive entity. Bugs are certainly down from when it was implemented, and active developer support (with fast results!) ensures that any really bad bugs tend to have pretty short lifespans. Having a "big", mostly bugfree release (nothing but extremely minor annoyances and obscure NES compatibility issues that you will never even realize are there) would be cool, but I hope that it wouldn't lead to the death of the change log system.

I suppose that I would vote that having a stable, bugfree version is the most important thing. I won't deny that I really want to see the remaining "promised for 2.5" features and would be sad if they were massively delayed (considering that massively delayed around here seems to suggest over a year of waiting), but if a choice had to be made between those features and stability, I think I'd go for stability. I'm not so sure that it has to be a total compromise situation as I don't see the b18 thing as too far off, and I don't see why b18 couldn't be a major quest building version. I mean, if we can get it down so we're sure that the only bugs are minor annoyances that don't really limit quest makers and obscure NES compatibility issues that 1/10000 would notice, I think we'd be pretty well off.

The quest database and the main site as a whole is pretty important, but I'd bet almost any amount of money that it will never work again. I've never actually seen it work in the first place, and all my investigation into the issue seems to suggest that few have the power to fix it and that, further, those that do have no real desire to fix it yet still are 100% unwilling to turn control over to someone who is. It's too bad as it's really imperative that it works, but I just don't see any reason to think that it will. No amount of complaining seems to help either; I just don't know what should be done about this.

Nicholas Steel

06-25-2007, 07:11 AM

i just want a stable player so i can enjoy all the old quests -.- because the 2.10 and older versions randomly crash on me.

a stable quest editor would be good for thos that enjoy making quests, i myself do not "enjoy" making quests, but i like to experiment.

Gleeok

06-25-2007, 07:22 AM

What happened to the progress of 2.10.3? I think that fixed all the crash bugs and all the other major ones too. Last time I checked there was only a handfull of things to fix. Is it still being worked on?

koopa

06-25-2007, 08:09 AM

I'm talking stop adding, anything incomplete be coded out, bugs fixed, stable version released now.

I wish it was that easy ... stop adding we might be able to do.
Get ZC stable overnight ... I wish we could.
Coding out ... I'd rather we left in what's already in or it'll only cause more problems if it's referenced elsewhere.

Basically, Freedom has a point but if ZC is buggy it's not because the developers want it that way.

Nicholas Steel

06-25-2007, 09:05 AM

yes, and i note that in most of these threads Freedom makes, he points his grubby fingers at L for the bugs.

CastChaos

06-25-2007, 09:13 AM

CastChaos signs up for wanting a stable ZC.

I see nothing more or less than bugs are fixed in every new alpha release. But I don't know if there are a set amount of bugs whiches are being kept pruned until they all vanish, oooor... a new alpha eliminates all previous bugs and these bugfixes create the new bugs?

I will probably finish my current quest with 2.10 even if 2.5 comes in the meantime (upgrading would be big work, whole quest needed to be redone), but still, there are people whos could use a stable version right... NOW!

The database's fix would be good, too. Why not delete the program line shards of the old one and create one from scratch? I thought a quest database is just a little HTML work, easy to do for beginners, too...

Petoe

06-25-2007, 09:27 AM

yes, and i note that in most of these threads Freedom makes, he points his grubby fingers at L for the bugs.
No one can deny that _L_'s features are unbeliveable and he definitely is not to be blamed for every single ZC bug.
It's just that without _L_ there most certainly would have been a stable ZC release a long time ago. Why in the world couldn't he wait for a stable release before all the new additions that made ZC the buggy crap it still is.
Once again forgive me, _L_. I personally don't see you as a bad person even though it seems so. I just think you're perhaps overly confident in your skills and the way you seem to add stuff behind everyone's back is just... agh. Oh well, I guess it is just too tough to say no to all the people who want all these insane features instead of stability... it would just be nice to see you saying that you undestand and agree that the community needs a stable ZC release and that you will only focus on bugs. That kind of message coming from your keyboard would probably lift my PO'd attitude...

Basically, Freedom has a point but if ZC is buggy it's not because the developers want it that way.

Well of course developers don't want intentionally make ZC buggy... or at least that's what I hope, but during ALL these YEARS I have seen no real effort to get a FULL and STABLE ZC release done.

You guys are finally fixing bugs, or so it seems, but I wonder how soon there will be another moment when people will go "Hmm... ZC is quite stable now, oh shit, _L_ added a bunch of features and ZC is ruined again!". Can you really promise that this won't happen again? No new features, not a new thing??? And what was wrong with the enemy editor in b254? Sure it wasn't as awesome as it is in the current betas but it worked pretty well and with a few fixes it would have been a good enemy editor for ZC 2.5. But no, _L_ had to change the whole custom enemy system and ruin all compatibility and probably further delay the release of something stable.
What happened to Beta18 anyways? Wasn't there talk about something like that some time ago? But no, we develoeprs want to make additions additions additions additions and changes changes changes changes!

You are saying that your main focus is fixing bugs now. Well maybe yours, DarkDragon, but what about the other developers? Yeah... It is just impossible to believe it after the dozens of mistakes and stupid decisions the developers have made, not listening to the voice of reason but instead of listening to "more more more better better better, yes ZC is almost stable and thats good enough for me!!" people.

And all the people who think and make claims that Freedom and I are just impatient and want to pressure the developers into releasing a stable ZC right now, that's bullshit. All we want is stability, no more changes, no more additions. None of you newbies can understand the frustration of Freedom. After years and years of investing his valuable time to ZC testing in hopes of there being a stable Zc as Jman promised, and then to find out that new features keep getting added every time ZC seems pretty close to being stable and the release of stable ZC looks further away every single day... It makes me sick to think about all those wasted hours. >_<

What is so freaking hard to understand this perfect quote from Freedom:
GET a stable version, THEN add more with the builds, DON'T just keep adding bloat to something that doesn't work already.

Beta Link

06-25-2007, 10:05 AM

The bug situation is certainly getting alot better. The change log was a very good thing! _L_ is not intentionally making ZC buggy. Sure, when he first started doing work on ZC, he was a little crazy with adding features, but he's much better with that now. At this point, he should just fix bugs, and put in the already-promised features (such as bottomless pits). I think he's been doing an excellent job with bug-fixing in any case.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 10:24 AM

Petoe and Freedom, I think we do agree that if _L_ tries to add another huge complex feature, we will all attempt to kill him. Right now we have pretty much some bugs to fix(which the number of is rapidly going down), some features to clean up (Item editor, etc.) and some features that we need(Sideview ladders, Talk combos, etc.)

I personally am very happy with where ZC is going right now, in relation to where it was. One look at the changelog shows how many bugs are being fixed.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 10:33 AM

Wait... do you think the current of level of bugfixing is an improvement, or not? I'd much rather go back to working on adding ZScriptable weapons (which many people have asked for) than continue bugfixing, if it's not going to make a difference either way.

When L first came here he said there was NO SUCH ANIMAL as bug free freeware.
If that's really his attitude, then he really will make no attempt to be part of releasing a bug free stable version.
IF that's the case, then NO you fixing bugs will make no difference, a buggy engine is a buggy engine is a buggy engine.
The most popular beta, the 183 still had serious problems, like the continue bug.
If the devs aren't going to try getting one out that's better than that, then why bother at all and why keep people believing and waiting for something that's not going to happen.

SO....
bugfixing is only important IF you are willing to see it through to its logical end, and so far that has never happened, not now, not with 183, not with 2.10.

What good are all these new features if you still can't make and complete a quest with the engine, and even if you did, nobody can or will host it?
Why is this simple truth so hard for some to understand?

Like I said above, look at the quest announcement forum, it's plain to see Zelda Classic is dying, you don't have to take my word for it.
It's dying for the very reason I've stated all along, no stable release in years, database screwed up for years.

Petoe

06-25-2007, 10:47 AM

Freedom, I guess you cannot blame the developers for the state of the database, that's all AGN's fault. But yeah, everything else you say is so true it hurts.
ZC is dying, you don't have to be Einstein to realize that. But why only such a small amount of people realize that ZC is dead soon and has been dying a long time? Unbeliveable.

Why exactly is the current build "unstable"? If you go to the bug forum, you can categorize bugs roughly as follows:

Small NES compatibility quirks, often very old (many)
Unforeseen consequences of earlier bugfixing (several)
Unfinished/broken features that have never fully worked (several, often involving Z3 animation)
Bugs with item properties (several, but now tailing off)
Bugs from new features (few)

Actually critical bugs - ZC crashing or corrupting quests - are not the ones that linger for months.

It seems like you are having the wrong attitude. It seems like you're saying that only serious bugs are bad and that some minor bugs shouldn't really bother questmaking. Well every single bug, no matter how minor, is a bad thing! Even if you're able to build quests, there's no sense doing so if you cannot play them the way they're supposed to be played. ZC is not stable and bugfree enough if it has any compatibility issues or any other unwanted or weird behaviour.

And like Freedom said, there can never be anything stable if every one of you developers cannot commit to bugfixing and bugfixing ONLY.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 10:56 AM

With all due respect...
The wrong turn was taken when L first arrive and started adding loads of features.

Adding features is fine, but a STABLE version had been promised first.
THen when L started adding, it made it IMPOSSIBLE for Jman to keep his word, and as a result Jman quit.

You say it's getting better, but what I see when I look at the bug forum is bugs being fixed that NEVER existed in the 2.11b10b which was the last real decent beta released before L's tirade into adding features.
So what you are really saying, weather you realise it or not, is it's getting better when compared to the depths it was taken from all of L's additions.

Additions are fine, but a stable release should have been done then as promised, because as it stands now, with all of your optimism, I still don't see one coming any time soon.

Petoe,
Of course I don't blame the developers for the database being down, that's warlords department, but it's still hurting Zelda Classic badly as a whole.
I don't blame L for adding a boatload of features, Dark Nation is the C.E.O. of the developers, it was up to him to set the schedule.
All in all, who's fault doesn't change anything, still no stable version, still no database.
What good does it do to point a finger at the guy that killed your cow, the cow is still dead anyway.
I wanna know...
Are they going to try and get another cow?

C-Dawg

06-25-2007, 11:03 AM

Awful lot of whining going on in this thread.

I've been coming more and more around to understanding that it's the bug-testers, not the developers, who are mostly responsible for the lack of a stable release. There are likely tens of thousands of possible interactions between the various features of Zelda Classic, any combination of which might lead to problems. Some issues are obvious, and easily fixed. Other bugs are obscure and hard to detect. We have a few people making regular bug reports, but not enough to be testing everything. For example, there are probably only three or four people bugtesting scripting, and I'm the only one I know of now rigorously testing scripting's interaction with combo animation and screen flags. (Working fine so far, luckily).

I don't want to rag on the testers too much, though. I find the latest betas to be remarkably bug-free. Certainly none of the big obvious bugs like crashing during editing, items not working, etc. In fact, I don't think I've encountered a single bug in 356 that breaks my quests except the possible bug regarding carryover FFCs. (Your milage may vary). The new betas work very, very well.

So just be patient, and help bug-test rather than sitting on the sidelines from your older versions. You can make great quests with the old stable release, as Dark and Petoe are doing. Or you can bug test to help get the newer versions out. But this whining doesn't accomplish anything.

Ninja Edit - And as for ZC dying... what? The forums at AGN have always been slow-paced, I havn't seen much change in that. PureZC has always been a pretty cliquish site. It shouldn't be suprising that membership doesn't change much at either place. I grant you that newbies will find it easier if the updated ZC file was availible from the front page in big dumb letters. I also grant you that A COMPREHENSIVE TUTORIAL COMPLETE WITH PICTURES IS NECESSARY HOLY SHIT. But I don't see this "ZC is dying" complaint.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 11:22 AM

Petoe

06-25-2007, 11:26 AM

Ok C-Dawg, maybe not dying, but its popularity has definitely decreased shitloads.

And sure, I guess you could put part of the blame on the ZC testers for the fact that there isn't a stable beta in sight. Only a few people are doing any testing, but can you blame the people who are not testing? Empty promises, broken promises, no new stable versions in ages even though it has been pretty close a few times... And then there's the new features, especailly scripting that no one knows shit about. Well yeah, you know because you are so goddamn smart, but there's no scripiting guides or any other FAQs made of the new features so how the hell can people test this new stuff when the developers don't care to explain how they work?? Geez.

And you saying that the newer builds are remarkably bugfree, well no offense but coming from you it is hard to believe. ;)
Even though you're in my opinion the #1 questmaker with your awesome design skills and story telling abilities, you never have taken bugs seriosuly, or so it seems. All your quest are so damn buggy, and it's a shame because that's really the only flaw I see you in as a questmaker. You just seem to think that bugs are a necessary evil and people should just live with them. Or have I interpreted you completely wrong?

But C-Dawg made a good point about not enough people testing.

Hmm... it is only talk, but it really seems the developers are finally concentrating on the right things and doing anything they can to get ZC stable.

Freedom... I know it is hypocrite of me to say this since just like you I have lost all faith in a stable ZC, but:
Can you find it in your heart to continue testing the ZC builds, despite everything? You were definitely the best and most hard working ZC tester and I really believe that if ZC is to ever get stable, it needs people like you to test it. I have to admit one of the reasons I stopped testing and lost motivation to work for the developers is because such an important person as yourself left. I am dead serious. It would give some hope to see you testing again. I know hope is not enough for you, and you have every right to be majorly pissed and not test, but I beg! :(
You do want to see your quests released some day, right? You may have wasted your time testing ZC, but what about the time you used to build your quests? Do you want to see that go to waste as well? What is needed for you to test again?

Oh well, whatever you do, I will always have truckloads of respect for you for being the voice of reason and fighting an uphill battle against all the developers and the ignorant people.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 11:41 AM

As a bug tester, I also think that we suffer from lack of understanding of the program. I mean, I've almost stopped reporting bugs, because half the time it turns out that I misunderstood somthing, and it was working fine. This isn't saying the program is too complex, this is saying that we don't understand where stuff comes from. As an example, I had a problem where my quiver always had infinite arrows. I reported it, and it turns out that if the power is set to 1(or was it 0. Nevermind) you had infinite arrows. I never knew that. But we can't cut that feature out because one person forgot it when someone else will use it. We could use some more cohesive documentation, I guess that's what I'm, saying.(Although I still say that I never touched that quiver, so how it got like that...)

Dan Furst

06-25-2007, 11:44 AM

I made a quest in late 2005. It was fun to make, and I had a good time with it. I played a few other quests as well.

I eventually became less interested and my only exposure to ZC was through my brother, who is almost finished making the quest he's been working on since said 'late 2005'.

With the addition of a scripting language, I've become interested once again. I realize how much potential there is in this effort.

I blame any loss of community on the nonfunctional website/database, in which case you should direct all compliants to WarLord.

It's funny how c-Dawg commented on the whining. I am reminded of the Little Red Hen.

Who will help me find the bugs? Not I.
Who will help me fix the bugs? Not I.
Who will help me test the fixes? Not I.
Who wants to use the finished product? ME ME!

The fact is, active quest development is possible on the platform of your choice. Use 1.92, 2.10, or b254. Sure there are minor inconveniences in each version, but they are not critical. My brother has been actively developing on 2.10 for two years, and none of the bugs have stopped him.

With regards to 2.5 or whatever the number is, there needs to be a defined endpoint. I'm pretty confident that no new large features are being added. However, there are still some incomplete features. There are about five or six more enemies that need rejiggered. L is doing that. There are a couple combos that need added/fixed (no enemies, sideview ladder, etc.). There are a couple of zscript functions that need added. Finalizations need to be made to the various new editors (although I admit I don't know exactly what). I would much rather see a complete version that a 98% complete one.

Remember the longshot in 2.10? Not implemented. I don't want to see anything like that in 2.5. The ideas of item, enemy, string, and subscreen editors need to be fully flushed out. The same with ZScript, Z3 movement, new combos, etc. It seems that the current builds are very close.

THEREFORE I PROPOSE THIS.

Let's make a detailed specification. Super detailed. It's something that should have been done at the start, but it be worth doing now. The entire scope of ZC/ZQ should be written down and agreed upon by the majority. Then there is a goal to work towards. Once that goal is met, the new version is released.

I'll start a thread.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 11:47 AM

I feel at this point that I should point out that War Lord has said that he's working on repairing the quest database.(Although we haven't heard anything in a while...)

Petoe

06-25-2007, 11:50 AM

As a bug tester, I also think that we suffer from lack of understanding of the program. I mean, I've almost stopped reporting bugs, because half the time it turns out that I misunderstood somthing, and it was working fine.

Exactly... EXACTLY!!! :)
To continue my message to C-Dawg, the lack of testing of the new features such as scripting is not the testers fault at all since there's no proper documentation/insturctions of all the new stuff. This one of the biggest reasons why testing just doesn't work.
If there could be a fix to this problem + all developers made a promise that there will be no new additions, none at all, we would be going to the correct direction definitely.
Oh and one more thing I ask from the developers is honesty. No more empty promises and optimistic predictions.

If all that could happen + testers like Freedom coming back, I would be a believer again.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 11:51 AM

Ok C-Dawg,
Freedom... I know it is hypocrite of me to say this since just like you I have lost all faith in a stable ZC, but:
Can you find it in your heart to continue testing the ZC builds, despite everything? You were definitely the best and most hard working ZC tester and I really believe that if ZC is to ever get stable, it needs people like you to test it. I have to admit one of the reasons I stopped testing and lost motivation to work for the developers is because such an important person as yourself left. I am dead serious. It would give some hope to see you testing again. I know hope is not enough for you, and you have every right to be majorly pissed and not test, but I beg! :(
You do want to see your quests released some day, right? You may have wasted your time testing ZC, but what about the time you used to build your quests? Do you want to see that go to waste as well? What is needed for you to test again?

Oh well, whatever you do, I will always have truckloads of respect for you for being the voice of reason and fighting an uphill battle against all the developers and the ignorant people.

Hell Petoe, I'm just like you on bug testing, LOST

L crammed all that shit in there, didn't explain how any of it is supposed to work, and then started insulting people like Shadowfall for reporting bugs that weren't there.
Who wants to get into that situation.

It's a no win situation, you get insulted for testing and don't get a stable release for your efforts anyway.
Been there, done that.

Majora

06-25-2007, 12:03 PM

I browse the bug report forums relatively often, and see no signs of insults. I myself understand the features and report bugs accurately. If I am in doubt about a possible bug, I read around the Beta forums. To my knowledge, when a feature is released, there is usually a thread or two pertaining to it. The problem (IMO) is that people are scared to push buttons in ZC. You would not BELIEVE the idiotic nature of some questions that are asked. So the Developers are doing an excellent job. Name some examples of features that got you lost.

bigjoe

06-25-2007, 12:09 PM

I think the real question is: Who doesn't want a stable release? It doesn't keep me from testing, though. No matter how bleak it looks, I keep the faith in my mind that one day there will be a stable enough release, along with a working Quest Database. In that respect, I guess I can brag about my patience. Because I certainly can't brag about my mediocre quests. :tongue:

I have found the lack of attention to a certain door locking bug to be a bit unnerving though.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 12:23 PM

DarkDragon

06-25-2007, 12:27 PM

Petoe: Of course I agree that any amount of bugs is bad. My point is that the more bugfree you want b18, the longer it is going to take to release. That has always been the trade-off; there certainly hasn't been a single release of ZC since the dawn of time which hasn't had a few little bugs. 2.50 should certainly be 100% bug free, but what about b18? I suppose a better question would have been, "how close is the current alpha to being released as b18?"

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 12:27 PM

Been reading the thread, getting happy and sad again like a rollercoaster, as usual, and two things dawned on me.

First.

L crammed all that shit in there, didn't explain how any of it is supposed to work, and then started insulting people like Shadowfall for reporting bugs that weren't there.
Who wants to get into that situation.I think this has been in the back of our minds for a while. It's far from a "MAJOR" point, but yes, it's a VERY good point that if we don't know how something works, then we can't really test it to the point where we can identify the program's faults (Bug-related or otherwise.) from our own lack of understanding. For example, it's a little hard to know why our custom items aren't working when all we see are "misc 1" and "flag 1" and "counter" and things like that. We have to go elsewhere for something that's not even an explanation, but just a list. With enough documentation and example quests backing these features, this problem could get stomped out rather quickly.

I remember L releasing a nice little example quest of the string editor. Naturally, most everyone looked to the thread it had been released in for the documentation, and tried to make a few interesting additions of their own. Some things worked, and others hadn't. I personally am still trying to figure out why the colors and fonts aren't really working properly, but I'm just not sure enough whether it's something I'm doing wrong, or if it's just not finished yet. I have to at least be able to tell the difference if I'm to bug test this, because I KNOW SOMETHING is happening, and colors ARE changing, but they're not matching up with what I was expecting. Thus, is it something like what the newcomers may experience with the warping schema and the Dmap slider? (Remember the trouble we used to have with that? .. Whooo boy. :rolleyes: XD ) It's just hard to tell.

So yes, Freedom, (et all.) I'm gladly with you on this point. It's something that can immediately and obviously benefit the entire community, and is something we can all take part in, mostly without the developers watching over our shoulders to see if we're doing it right, as the effects are obvious to us with or without them in terms of what we can see when we do it.

Secondly.

It's a bit too late to be coding things out or firing someone to hope to get a more stable, or, dare I say it, a perfect release as people are hoping for. There's little anyone can do besides not introducing new features and testing what's there heavily and fixing bugs to speed things along aside from beg jman to come back and find out where DN's been. No matter how much we beg, no matter how much we flame, no matter how much we stop testing out of the futility of it all, it's not going to change a thing for the better. Hell, the more people whine, the more futile it seems for the developers that people aren't appreciating all the effort they're going to now for the sake of people who do nothing but whine that they're not trying harder than they already are. (Don't be blaming the knight when his horse keeper is starting wars behind him.)

As it stands, the code is far too interwired, to put it in non-C++ terms, to be coded out. If you start pulling things out under a car, it stops working. Same concept here. Things could be referencing other things that you wouldn't even dream about until after the total disaster, and you'd have far more to fix then than you would have had you left it to be. As I said, the Devs are making great progress, but going backwards now isn't the solution. Why climb the four miles down to the Earth when you've got one mile left to reach the heavens?

EDIT: Oh, .. the Database is probably not even really a part of the Devs' work. Eckels first coded it, and I don't believe he's done anything else for ZC aside from build a quest. The Database is more in AGN's Admins' hands than in the Devs'.

BTW, bigjoe, happy pre-5,000th post. :thumbsup: Could everyone include a little congrats in their posts? ^^. Would brighten up the atmosphere a bit. That's always nice. :)

Limzo

06-25-2007, 12:37 PM

I wholeheartedly agree!! Please, devs, no more new features! No more! I think we've established enough of a difference from 2.10 now, even without the subscreen editor or scripting! Please guys! Get rid of the unfinished bits, don't add any new features, and just get rid of the bugs! Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease!! If there's anything you DO want to add, do it AFTER the stable release! It gives us something to look forward to! Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease!!!

Majora

06-25-2007, 12:38 PM

You must realize 2 things:

1) He has a point
If no immediate documentation is available, what should a tester do? How about WHAT S/HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO? What might that be you ask? Hmmm.... I don't know.... something like TEST?! If a feature is vague and undocumented, I severely doubt any harm will come of experimenting with it.

2) That's not a blatant attempt at insulting someone.
Out of everyone involved with ZC, testers, Quest Makers, players, etc., I expect the Developers themselves to be extremely annoyed (if not pissed off by now), and disgruntled. So don't act so surprised and offended when a Developer seems to insult someone. Within reasonable limits of course, so long as it's not an outright (and obvious) attempt to insult. I'm surprised DN hasn't cursed someone out yet, seeing as how he's been on board the longest.

EDIT: This post is directed at Freedom's post, the one that pointed out a case of a Dev "insulting" someone.

Petoe

06-25-2007, 01:01 PM

Your post has a lot of good points and truth in it, ST.

Even though it seems like the only solution for ZC to ever be stable is to remove _L_'s features and _L_ himself as a developer, that would probably do more harm than good at this point, I gotta admit that. And I have some fragments of faith left in _L_. He has some great ability and skill, it's just that his attitude is so wrong. :( I really want to believe that he can learn from his mistakes and that he can be a good developer for ZC. I'm even willing to forgive all the grey hair he has given me if he just can make a promise of concentrating on bugfixing only and keeping that promise. If _L_ would concentrate on the right things, he would probably be a priceless asset for ZC. But with his actions so far he seems like a demon to some people and for a reason IMO.

Oh well, every time a thread like this pops up I am usally taking part in it. My posts are full of hate and anger and frustration, so it may seem like I don't appreciate the developers and that I despise them. That is not true at all! Everyone who becomes a ZC developers is a gutsy creature, and every time a developer fixes even one bug, my respect towards him rises a lot. But where does my anger come from? It comes from the fact that posts by Freedom and I don't seem to be taken seriously at all, and what comes to _L_, I've never even seen him apologize for the issues he has caused.
I'm just a lifeless guy with too much time and too much passion for ZC so forgive me. I invest tons of time for ZC and questbuilding. Quest making is my passion. I want to create stable and bugfree quests. It hasn't been possible after ZC 1.90 which was released about 5-6 years ago. But it's not the time that makes me frustrated. It's all the repeated mistakes. I can wait for a full stable release as long as needed. It's enough if one is eventually coming and all developers are working together for that dream, bugfixing being their main focus. All the mistakes that have been done, I can accept them and move on. Everybody makes mistakes. I just cannot take any more mistakes an bad decisions by the developers, there's a limit for that.

You developers should really try talking to each other more. DN should make clear to all of you what he wants and what should be the main focus with ZC... unless he has done that already.

Even though I'm just as frustrated as Freedom is, for some reason I'm still having urge to test ZC even though there's always the danger of all the effort going to waste like it seems to have gone so far. I dunno... a voice inside tells me that no matter what, too many mistakes have been done and there just won't be a stable ZC ever, but dammit, I'm not ready to accept that ZC is dead and beyond fixable. As long as nothing new is added to ZC, and as long as developers will try to explain all the new features better, I might try testing again after I get this major quest project released (which BTW is only possible because of Dark Nation and his bugfixes to b254. DN you're the best). And it would be nice to see something from _L_ himself, like a promise of no new additions or something. I want to see commitment from him to fix bugs! I mean, what prevents him from adding more stuff even though everyone's saying that no new fetures will be introduced...

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 01:05 PM

AH! Our first call-in! This is from Hunter P Brown of Texas, USA. Stationed at PureZC, he writes via PM:

If a stable ZC does come out without all the glitches and bugs (we'll keep hunting for them, btw), I'll likely get back into ZC. If anyone remember the Separation of Boy and Girl game from around 2002, I can get back to working on the sequels and the DX version of the original. That'd be awesome."Ain't that just grand. Rock on, Hunter my man! Peace.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 01:24 PM

Majora's Wrath,
You and I don't see things at all the same.
I see Shadowfall as a guy that does some of the top quest work in Zelda Classic, who has been around years longer than L, being insulted by a guy that set Zelda Classic promised stable release back probably years.

I considered his remarks toward Shadowfall insulting, weather you do or not, but more importantly, Shadowfall did.

I spent all of 2005 and 2006 beta testing with the promise, no the guarantee, of a stable release, and here it is 6 months after it was guaranteed and it's further away then it's ever been.

Where is my incentive to get back to testing, what's in it for me?
Guarantees and promises were already broken, what expectation do I have that the same won't happen again?

I started this thread for two reasons, to give others that want a stable release a place to say so, and to give the devs a chance to honestly give an answer to a time frame if it's ever going to happen, so I'd know NOW to wait around or move on and give up on it once and for all.

As things stand right now, quests I am working on are being done in 2.11b10 and if they are completed there is still no place that can or will host them anyway, so all the newer features that caused the promises to be broken mean little to me anyway.
Castle Haunt III was released in the 2.11b10b and even though it's the best of all the Castle Haunts by far it has gotten very little notice since people don't want to download the 2.11b10b engine to play it, and it isn't seen because PureZC won't host it, and AGN CAN'T host it, so as you can see "incentive" is getting trashed from every angle here now.

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 01:33 PM

Castle Haunt III was released in the 2.11b10b and has gotten very little notice since people don't want to download the 2.11b10b engine to play it, and it isn't seen because PureZC won't host it, and AGN CAN'T host it, so as you can see "incentive" is getting trashed from every angle here now.Ask around for a host. Some people are more willing to provide for the great quest makers of our day than not. I just don't want to force such a decision on anyone by mentioning their names.

If you don't want to trouble anyone, there's also MegaUpload.com. Just keep the resulting links in your signature or in a thread, and you're good to go for quite a while.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 01:43 PM

Ask around for a host. Some people are more willing to provide for the great quest makers of our day than not. I just don't want to force such a decision on anyone by mentioning their names.

If you don't want to trouble anyone, there's also MegaUpload.com. Just keep the resulting links in your signature or in a thread, and you're good to go for quite a while.

It's hosted on Elise's server and board, and on my server, but where do people go to find quests Shadowtiger?
They go to Pure's database and AGN's database, do they not? ;)

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 01:53 PM

I tend to find the most quests when they advertise it themselves. ;) Like what's in your signature. If they turn it off, it's their loss.

Freedom

06-25-2007, 01:57 PM

People that come to these sites to PLAY quests do things differently.
They aren't interested in spending hours going through all the posts, they want to get the quest, play it, and look to the one forum dealing with it for all their questions. ;)

You and I might do so differently because we're hanging around here with no life anyway

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 02:26 PM

Right. (To both points.) I remember back in 2000 and 2002 when I was looking for quests. I found them ... everywhere. It was mostly in peoples' signatures, since there wasn't really an established database like what AGN's was, and Pure's didn't have a lot in it, (Although there was that one from ZCN, and that one hosted by ... ... ... Um ... That person with the cloud avatar. Cyclone, right, I think. Although, since the Database is actually down, people NEED to go to peoples' signatures and the forums to find the quests, or to Pure's expanded database now, or to wherever people refer others to.

So if we want the database restored, it's not something the ZC Devs can do on their own. War Lord himself needs to do it, from what I keep hearing, and it's something to appeal to him for. There's an #AGN chat we can go to to see if he's there.

No kudos for bigjoe? .. Nobody? .. Aww. =/

Freedom

06-25-2007, 03:29 PM

If you noticed I said the exact same thing earlier about Warlord needing to deal with the database.
BUT I will make this tentative offer....
Once my house sells and I get moved, if Warlord will let me know how much server space is needed and let me grab all the quests, I'll set up a server and a database and host all the quests.
It might not be the most fancy thing on the block but it will work and be there, and I won't let it sit tore up for any year +.

As for beta testing...
I've lost faith that they will use my time wisely and to get a stable release out, I already invested time for that reason and feel my time was wasted, and I'd rather waste my own time in my own way.
And since I can't program then there is little else I can do for Zelda Classic other than be disappointed with what has become of it.
There could have been a stable release long ago, but the decision was made NOT to do that, why I won't even try to guess.

C-Dawg

06-25-2007, 03:40 PM

A comprehensive quest database should also provide the correct version of ZClassic in one easy download. That is, each quest file is labeled according to which version is necessary. In big, stupid letters, the site should warn people that if they don't have the proper version, they need to click a radio button before they download the quest. The radio button will toggle the download between a zip file with just the quest, and a zip file with the quest AND THE PROPER VERSION OF ZQUEST.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 03:41 PM

Shadowfall may be a dedicated tester, but he also went wayyyy overboard in that one thread. Like his honor and life depended on it, or something. And I know I'm building my quest for 2.5, because frankly, 2.10 doesn't have what I need for my quest. I'm not talking enemy editors and stuff, I'm talking Roc's feather and FFC's.

Maybe itme and enemy editors were a bit complex, but I see it as:

1.) Can't do anythign about it now.
2.) They are pretty awsome.
3.) Once 2.5 does come out, you can bet peoples jaws are going to drop.
4.) 2.5 promises to have a few pretty cool release quests as well that will help pul people in. LI for one, and my massive quest that I'm working on.

Dark Nation

06-25-2007, 04:03 PM

Added a poll. Continue discussion if you wish, but be sure to vote in order to be counted.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 04:20 PM

I really can't vote. On the one hand, we need a stable 2.5 ASAP. On the other there are features like A->String combos and Side View ladders that I think we also really need. I do say though, that we can get rid of stuff in the enemy, item, and subscreen editors that aren't "implemented" yet. Those work well enough already that we can wait until post-2.5. The only thing I think we need to add there is the option for enemy sizes larger than 1 tile, because there is going to be an uproar on release if there isn't.

Majora

06-25-2007, 04:25 PM

Complete Feature Halt. As of today, absolutely NOTHING should be added. Only little things that take like 10 lines of code and are virtually bug-free.

2.5 now!

Questions

06-25-2007, 04:40 PM

I disagree, as much as I'd like for 2.5 to come out, an incomplete release is just as bad as a buggy one (IMO). But I'll be fine either way.

C-Dawg

06-25-2007, 04:42 PM

As long as scripting stays in, the rest of the new features can be taken care of at the user end. So I'm all for a stable release at this point.

Not that I'd mind a little added functionality in scripting...

Linkus

06-25-2007, 04:42 PM

As far as what I can see, there are things that should be done to speed up the release of 2.11/2.5. For instance, there are certain things that I see that are worth keeping for now, others aren't, as in this list:

~Things we don't need right now~
1. Z3 Animation. I say put this in the next beta after ZC 2.11/2.5 since it's too buggy and requires much more work to fully complete.

2. Complex features in the editors. One suggestion for this is the Subscreen Editor. Basic selections are fine, but do we need an unimplemented Selected Item->Tile? No. Keep these out of the list until fully functional.

3. Roc's Feather. Until adjusting Z variables(made a suggestion on that) and drowning is possible, it's just pretty and has little use. Its fate should reside with Z3 Animation, though.

~Things we do need~
1. The loud and clear statement that you do not need scripts to make a quest, and that it is an optional feature for advanced users. This scares beginners away from ZC most of the time.

2. An updated Zquest.txt file. Someone is working on that, right? Even more to boot, why not make a Zquest.hlp file as a second source?

3. "NES Style" quest rule. Recently the devs say that the bugs are mainly quirky NES inconsistencies... Why not make a quest rule that uses somewhat modified(updated for custom items and such) code from an earlier build that actually works like the original LoZ?

4.(For Alphas/Betas)"Bug Report List" txt file, updated when ZQ crashes or makes errors; reports exact point in the script where the beta crashes or errs in a txt file. For this, I say beta testers should keep this file open while working in ZQ, that way they know if an error is a bug or not. Definitely useful, but I don't know how this could work.

Anyone here agree?

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 04:45 PM

Hm. Would it still be called "The finished Zelda Classic 2.5" if it had features that are obviously unfinished with no use? Is the human body "finished" with the Appendix in it? ... Just something to think about; it has no impact on anything either way. :p

If we just stop finishing up the unfinished .. things, ... there are quite a few things which need to be removed before it can be considered "complete." At least for illusions' sake. Just so people don't download it and say "Hey, why doesn't this work?!! All the bugs are out!!!"

.. Actually, this would just mean that ZC 2.5 would be identical to Beta 403 in every way except for the lack of bugs. I guess that's what it'd mean. No finished Subscreen or item or enemy editor. Misc values would remain inoperable. There would just be no bugs associated with them, unless you consider the lack of functional prompts or checkboxes and such a bug.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 04:53 PM

Linkus, the Roc's feather works fine. What are you talking about?

And yeah, all of the unimplemented stuff in the Subscreen editor can wait, btu it should at least be removed, so no one says "Hey, how come this stuff isn't implemented?"

Linkus

06-25-2007, 05:00 PM

What I mean is that the very complex ones will be removed, ST. the editors would still be there, but it wouldn't be very flexible, since some options won't be there because they either are broken and still in early development or haven't been implemented at all yet. In case, fix most of the pestilent problems right now, then decide what suggestions should be added/removed for ZC 2.11 and later betas.

Ebola Zaire

06-25-2007, 05:01 PM

The Roc's Feather messes up when layers are used. And ALL good questmakers use layers, so the Roc's Feather is either A)not in the quest or B)disabled for 98% of the time. I say take it out until a Z-Axis is implemented.

I'm all for a stable release now. But, the devs shouldn't stop working on new features. Continue on, just put them in a 2.6 version. Or something. Just get it out!

ShadowTiger

06-25-2007, 05:02 PM

What I mean is that the very complex ones will be removed, ST.I know, isn't that what I said? .. Actually I may not have, visually; When I post, I post like an organization of crumpled up pieces of paper. Yeah, I meant what you're conveying there.

Linkus

06-25-2007, 05:04 PM

Linkus, the Roc's feather works fine. What are you talking about?

Has drowning/melting/falling into a pit been implemented yet? The original idea of Roc's Feather was to bypass certain hindrances, like water, lava, and pits, and reaching ledges(and enemies) in sidewivew areas.

bigjoe

06-25-2007, 05:07 PM

I'm all for a stable release now. But, the devs shouldn't stop working on new features. Continue on, just put them in a 2.6 version. Or something. Just get it out!

My thoughts exactly. ZC loses public interest because

A. No working QDB
B. Very long periods of time between releases.

If those two problems can be remedied, the community is sure to thrive again.

The_Amaster

06-25-2007, 05:09 PM

Okay, true, things around the Roc's feather need work. But the feather itself is good. And now that it looks like we might lose the feather, I would like to re-re-suggest my "1 feature build" idea, so I don't have to wait till 2010 for the feather and other items.

Majora

06-25-2007, 05:10 PM

The Feather and Scripting stay IN. Everything else unfinished/buggy/not implemented can wait. I have MADE the feather functional in my quest. Heck, you START with it. Also, level 4 is HEAVILY dependant on scripting, and the boots are not in. How will the player get across large "gaps" of damage combos? With the feather, and Hover boots. If those are taken out, my whole quest goes down the drain. :|

Clean up scripting, optimize/add to it later. DEBUG everything. But certainly don't remove useful things. When Documentation arrives, the Newbies will look at scripting and laugh. So keep scripting and the Feather, otherwise 2.5 won't be here for a while.... because then ZC will be 2.3 if you remove those two things.

EDIT: Kudos to BigJoe for 5K posts! :D

bigjoe

06-25-2007, 05:11 PM

The feather is already in, no need to take it out just because features surrounding it dont work.

Shoelace

06-25-2007, 05:13 PM

Okay, everyone knows, that I am a huge supporter of the bug-free 2.5. I been waiting for a hell of a long time for it. And lately, the developers been doing great.

But when you add those things like sidescroller, etc. there so going to be things you have to add, like ladders. Now that it is added, you have finish it as the feature wouldn't be finished. I know that will take longer to do, but it is already added, you have finish it as people are excepting it, and to me that is like a bug. As for new, new features, wait until after 2.5.

I just think that they have to finish the features that are planned, and then make it stable. I know that will take long. I know that there may be a chance that I may leave ZC before then, however, I don't want them to not finish things that people are expecting. But don't release it without being stable afterwards.

Master_of_Power

06-25-2007, 05:31 PM

This is a hard choice, honestly.

I want both stability AND functionality. All the good features should be in AS WELL AS bug fixes.

SpacemanDan

06-25-2007, 05:48 PM

Fix what needs to be fixed then finish off the planned stuff! It may take longer to iron out the bugs for it, but it will be complete. I don't want to see another case where some features are there, but they just doesn't do anything. (Longshot in 2.10) Anything other than what's been started or planned should just be left out until the next release.

billyronald

06-25-2007, 05:55 PM

Look here is what I think you should do

Finish

Bottomless Pits and Drowning
Sideview Stepladder
Choose fonts in the String Editor
Ladder combo

Compleat the changes to the eminey editor

Also I hear something about a custom item drop editer or something is this true (an editor that you can pick what emies drop on death (and what i meen is like hearts ruppies and so on)) and if so finish it

also my spelling is bad because it is late where i live and I'm tired

Also i can't vote in the poll yet (not enthoe postes)

C-Dawg

06-25-2007, 06:02 PM

1. The loud and clear statement that you do not need scripts to make a quest, and that it is an optional feature for advanced users. This scares beginners away from ZC most of the time.

What's that high-pitched whine I'm hearing again? I've been hearing alot of it around these days... makes me feel oddly compelled to say:

1. Once a script is completed, applying it is no more complicated than setting up a Combo. Not everyone needs to script, but everyone can learn how to apply a script while knowing zilch about the script itself.
2. Supply and demand. As more people use scripts, more people will make them.
3. The more users are scripting, THE LESS NEED THERE IS FOR THE DEVS TO ADD NEW FEATURES. You want something new? Script it or ask someone to script it. I know scripters don't get to every suggestion in the ZScript Request forums, but most of them get done eventually.

Stop it with the script-phobia. No, you don't need to use it to make a great quest. Yes, it will add features to your quest. Learn to love it.

SpykStorm

06-25-2007, 06:07 PM

I cant vote on this poll either, but if I could I would vote for a stable release
before adding new features.

Edit; I dont want to code out any Incomplete features though.

s2dve

06-25-2007, 06:53 PM

Ditto for me.

Some of you act like the next release is the last one that ever going to happen.

Please make it as bug free as possible.:)

Nicholas Steel

06-25-2007, 07:39 PM

I agree that L made a massive mistake in that he added scripting and other stuff that set back a stable 2.11 beta 10b a fair bit.

i agree that darkdragon and others are currently putting a much greater focus on bug fixing.

L is starting to focus more on bug fixing.

-----
the thing i find at the moment annoying is that there is NO stable version, I CAN NOT PLAY OLD QUESTS PERFECTLY ! nor have i seen a decent quest be made with any of the alpha's, so i assume there are still plenty of bugs in zquest to piss off most people who know what there doing.

there IS documentation, however it is all over the forums in various places, and worst of all, you have to pay AGN if you want to be able to search the forums.

what happened to 2.10.2 and newer builds? we were promised i think a stable 2.10, what happened to it? no status update on it in months >.>

----------

EDIT: whats the point in finishing it if the people that DO make decent quests are 90 years old by the time a stable version is made? no offense intended for all the mediocre quest makers intended.

elise

06-25-2007, 08:24 PM

okay here we go again , we really need a stable version and we need it soon , questmakers don't make quests anymore they are all waiting , players can't even download a quest anymore here ( I know that's up to warlord but Dark Nation is also an admin here and maybe he can convince him how important it is we tried several times but failed ) I know we still can download quests from PureZc but really that isn't a Questdatabase like the one we have here .......if you like it or not here is the big Zelda gang coming for everything , and what do they find at this moment nothing .
So PLEASE make a stable release so questmakers can start making quests again
, Please warlord make that questdatabase so we can get the programs and quests again without going through all kind of tricks to get them , and when thats all done and everybody is happy again go and make other stable versions with new adds in it

Evan the Great

06-25-2007, 09:21 PM

I say fix all the bugs, don't add anything new, and just release it. We don't need any new features, alls we need is a stable engine to make our Zelda games on, and to play these games too.

beefster09

06-25-2007, 11:12 PM

I'm more neutral-- leaning towards stability, but I picked features... Could you switch my vote?

We need a few features-- finish the ones that were started at least a month ago (except drowning!), finish off the signpost combos (maybe), finish implementing anything unfinished in ZScript... But other than that, BUGFIXES ONLY!!!!!

Or we could just stop now and bugfix and call it 2.40. I can live with what we have for a while. If we stop now, it's no doubt not the final version.

I hate all of the 1.92 and 2.10 bugs!

Dark Nation

06-25-2007, 11:20 PM

Okay, all PureZC members that wanted to vote here but couldn't should be able to do so now. However, to prevent poll skewing, please make a note in the PureZC thread about this poll:

http://www.purezc.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=29136

However, for those that have created an account here for voting purposes, only people with 50 or more posts at PureZC will be counted.

Petoe

06-25-2007, 11:23 PM

As I've been saying a thousand times already and to answer the poll question: Halt with the new stuff and fix the damned bugs! Not a single new thing added or ZC will never be stable + this questmaker will pull all his support from ZC. Period.

SpykStorm

06-26-2007, 12:03 AM

Ok, I voted now, I picked
Release - Complete feature halt / reversion. Bugs fixes are the only work allowed.

Freedom

06-26-2007, 12:26 AM

Dark Nation, L, Koopa, DarkDragon, and anyone else who might be developing.

With all due respect, what you guys are doing and have done is deeply appreciated.

There are two things however that have come to be a sore spot with me and I'm sure others.

1) the many times my quest (s) have become corrupted from upgrading to a new beta, FFC's getting wiped out, subscreens turning to crap, etc.

The only way I can make progress in my quest and feel safe in doing so is to keep building in 2.11b10b or another earlier build, and just ignoring the new builds, OR be a full time tester and ignore my quests.

2) Not really being informed about progress.
Sure I can see in the channel log what bugs have been fixed, but I don't know how many are still being added, or any time frame of WHEN they (bugs) will stop being added, and seeing the same bugs come back time and time again is a real pisser.

THIS is why I've been so insistent on a stable release.
My tileset I built while waiting on a stable release was done in 2.10, there's no taking it back to 183 without just redoing it all, and 2.10 isn't suitable to use anyway, in addition I've moved up to 2.11b10b so going back to 2.10 even if DN finished doing a 2.10.3 isn't much of an option either.

I don't mind beta testing one bit, but I do mind when it becomes ALL I can do because I can no longer work on my quest because of fear of one of the betas destroying it again.

Do you realize how many times I've added and then removed things like true arrows, or scrolls, or subscreens to go back and forth with these betas?
It's a total waste of time, and it removes all the JOY from dealing with this program.

All these features added by L as of late are a nice thing, but where they all necessary before a stable release which is causing builders like myself such frustration?
I don't believe so, but I'm just one opinion of many.
If there's some reason that I'm not aware of to keep postponing a stable release, by all means let me know and I'll stop asking for it.

Gleeok

06-26-2007, 12:51 AM

I'm gonna say the same thing here as I said at PureZC: LET THE DEVELOPERS FINISH WHAT THEY STARTED. They agreed upon a plan as to what features should be worked on and implemented in 2.5, and are trying to meet that goal with steady and definative progress. If mistakes were made in the past, it is exactaly that, the past. Constantly whining about it does absolutely NO good whatsoever. You want a stable version rushed out, well think back to 2.10, wasn't that rushed out? As far as the argument "well once they finish these new features, they're just gonna keep adding more, more, more" I don't think that is the case. It's been argued too many times, and I think the Devs are working on getting everything together and trying to make b18 as bugfree as possible. From what i've read the enemy re-jiggering is almost done, the message, item, and string editor have few bugs, along with Zscript. Why work so hard to rush out an incomplete 2.5? I also realize this post will be subject to counter-posts and random bashings with pointy sticks, But I have to side with the developers here, they have an intamate knowledge of coding ZC, and if they believe a stable beta is not far off I will believe them. Thus I propose three things:

1) A stable 2.10.3 -DN is this still progressing? I too would love to see a stable 2.10

2) Not rushing out and a massive bugfix b18 and making it a quest designers dream.

3) No newer new features beyond that which is being ironed out.

-Therefore I have to vote 1: finish the features as planned, don't half-ass anything.

-N

Freedom

06-26-2007, 01:09 AM

The developers agreed on a stable release last year too.

As for constantly whining, I've only returned to this board twice now in the last 6 months for two short periods of a couple of days, so I don't think asking for a stable release is whining, or do I think it's been constant.
You seem to be a new hog here, so I can understand you not minding the wait, I was that way for my first few years too, now I want something stable I can just use and release quests with.
If that's not going to happen any time soon, then all I want is for them to be honest and say so, if finishing up what is there now isn't months or years away again, then they can say that too.

Dark Nation

06-26-2007, 01:12 AM

http://www.armageddongames.net/forums/announcement.php?f=149

Gleeok

06-26-2007, 01:32 AM

As for constantly whining, I've only returned to this board twice now in the last 6 months for two short periods of a couple of days, so I don't think asking for a stable release is whining, or do I think it's been constant.

I was more referring to the constant bashing over the head with a nerf bat of _L_, Whom many point the finger at. Which doesn't help matters any and isn't going to make 2.5 get done any faster, so I see no point in it.

Nicholas Steel

06-26-2007, 02:59 AM

thank you DN for doing something :) greatly appreciated.

CastChaos

06-26-2007, 04:02 AM

(copy/paste from PureZC)

I voted 2.

If the developers try to finish/add all the features they planned ever and they slip occassionaly some more new features in, then there will be NEVER a stable version.

The ONLY way to release a stable 2.50 is to stop all new features, don't improve the already existing ones and fix all bugs one after another!

Again, adding/improving features would leah to a cascade of bugs whiches would be too many to find and especially to truthfully analyse. Get used to the thought of Truth.

ShadowTiger

06-26-2007, 07:07 AM

I don't mind beta testing one bit, but I do mind when it becomes ALL I can do because I can no longer work on my quest because of fear of one of the betas destroying it again.

Do you realize how many times I've added and then removed things like true arrows, or scrolls, or subscreens to go back and forth with these betas?
It's a total waste of time, and it removes all the JOY from dealing with this program.I remember when NeoFirst got corrupted a lot. Tough to keep plowing through and fixing it over and over again. :-/ Backups were saved and used, saves were made every few minutes, (If not less. Honest to gosh, at one point I was saving every two actions under five different backup names.) but everyones' tenacity is slowly starting to pay off! :) It's a slow process, but since no more features will be added or fixed, there's nothing else to do but see a stable release sooner than later!

Take a look at these great bugfixes.

* Editing a combo after having moved/deleted an animating combo no longer corrupts your combo table.The Garbage Combo bug! We'll have to test this one a lot, but THIS ... ... is one of those bugs that all the major, serious questbuilders had feared as the Kraken to their prized sea vessel. This is definitely one to test for the extinction of. Let us sail our ships boldly across the seas in the hunt of this ever-elusive creature in the hopes that we will all come back merely wet and barnacled by sundown. :ooh:

* Inserting combos on the combo page (with the 'i' key) now correctly updates combo aliases and freeform combos.This now allows all Combo Aliases and Freeform Combos to be created without regard toward its placement. Have you ever used the "i" key in the combo page? Koopa (With DN's Help.) has created a self-contained masterpiece. Try it (And its counterpart, Shift-i) out in the combo pages. It's so perfect for those who forgot a combo or two (thousand). :p

What else is there that I'm forgetting...

Well, anyway, we'll get there. So now all the bugs in 403 are mostly just minor ones. If you've got backups of your quests from earlier builds, it couldn't hurt to upgrade, knowing you can always roll back to your previous one, while taking screenshots of new art and screens and such beforehand if you do have to roll back.

Nicholas Steel

06-26-2007, 07:57 AM

i always love reading your posts ST, you word everything so perfectly >.> you always seem to sound so wise and you always make excellent use of AGN's emoticons ^^.

its pretty obvious with this poll here that people want a stable build.

Sephiroth

06-26-2007, 10:16 AM

I say a feature freeze, and get ZC to a stable state.

Also, the QDB should be fixed as well.

I think this has been in the back of our minds for a while. It's far from a "MAJOR" point, but yes, it's a VERY good point that if we don't know how something works, then we can't really test it to the point where we can identify the program's faults (Bug-related or otherwise.) from our own lack of understanding. For example, it's a little hard to know why our custom items aren't working when all we see are "misc 1" and "flag 1" and "counter" and things like that. We have to go elsewhere for something that's not even an explanation, but just a list. With enough documentation and example quests backing these features, this problem could get stomped out rather quickly.

I remember L releasing a nice little example quest of the string editor. Naturally, most everyone looked to the thread it had been released in for the documentation, and tried to make a few interesting additions of their own. Some things worked, and others hadn't. I personally am still trying to figure out why the colors and fonts aren't really working properly, but I'm just not sure enough whether it's something I'm doing wrong, or if it's just not finished yet. I have to at least be able to tell the difference if I'm to bug test this, because I KNOW SOMETHING is happening, and colors ARE changing, but they're not matching up with what I was expecting. Thus, is it something like what the newcomers may experience with the warping schema and the Dmap slider? (Remember the trouble we used to have with that? .. Whooo boy. :rolleyes: XD ) It's just hard to tell.

...snip...

...snip... As long as nothing new is added to ZC, and as long as developers will try to explain all the new features better ...snip...

Documentation is one thing ZC needs right now. A lot of the features are usually unexplained when they're implemented. It shouldn't hurt to write up a text file to go with the newest betas that explain what the features do.. Or maybe the help text file you get when pressing F1 should be updated? I don't know.

What's that high-pitched whine I'm hearing again? I've been hearing alot of it around these days... makes me feel oddly compelled to say:

1. Once a script is completed, applying it is no more complicated than setting up a Combo. Not everyone needs to script, but everyone can learn how to apply a script while knowing zilch about the script itself.
2. Supply and demand. As more people use scripts, more people will make them.
3. The more users are scripting, THE LESS NEED THERE IS FOR THE DEVS TO ADD NEW FEATURES. You want something new? Script it or ask someone to script it. I know scripters don't get to every suggestion in the ZScript Request forums, but most of them get done eventually.

Stop it with the script-phobia. No, you don't need to use it to make a great quest. Yes, it will add features to your quest. Learn to love it.

Nine times out of ten, people that make a great script, just like people that make great tilesets, aren't going to easily release these scripts, because they're encrypted within the quest file. So we need people like you to help urge people to release their scripts, and maybe some thorough documentation on what script events do what, and explain things like sites like php.net's manual and python's manual sites do. There's thorough documentation for each function there. Why not with ZC's scripting abilities as well?

The_Amaster

06-26-2007, 12:31 PM

I really want a stable 2.5 as well, but I'm just afraid that if we don't finish up a few features, it'll be years before we see them in a stable build. I really think we should finish up the bugfixing, release 2.5, then make 2.6 have signposts, 2.7 have sideview ladders, 2.8 have drowning, etc., with only a few weeks/months between versions.

bigjoe

06-26-2007, 12:58 PM

DarkDragon

06-26-2007, 01:11 PM

Sideview ladders, as a borderline bug in the sideview engine, were given an explicit exception to the general ban on new features during the developer discussion about the ban.

Dan Furst

06-26-2007, 04:51 PM

So we need people like you to help urge people to release their scripts, and maybe some thorough documentation on what script events do what, and explain things like sites like php.net's manual and python's manual sites do. There's thorough documentation for each function there. Why not with ZC's scripting abilities as well?

There is some pretty decent documentation in each alpha release. (zscript.txt) The only thing that is missing is documentation on syntax.

I'll make some syntax documentation and put it in the SPEC topic.

C-Dawg

06-26-2007, 05:48 PM

Nine times out of ten, people that make a great script, just like people that make great tilesets, aren't going to easily release these scripts, because they're encrypted within the quest file. So we need people like you to help urge people to release their scripts

Like who? I don't know of anyone who is scripting in the dark. Every new script I hear of gets posted in Script Showcase pretty quickly.

ShadowTiger

06-26-2007, 06:23 PM

I too honestly barely know of anyone at all that's withholding a script. I really hope that this doesn't turn into some sort of "It's my art, I drew it, so I should keep it to myself" sort of thing. Scripters appear to be even rarer than graphic artists.

I think we should/could also hold "classes" (Ha...) relating to ZScript and the like. Very possible using MoonEdit.

(One Hour Later...) EDIT: I just realized I made a pun where I meant to be ever so slightly sarcastic in that non-hostile way. Heh!

Majora

06-26-2007, 07:03 PM

Like who? I don't know of anyone who is scripting in the dark. Every new script I hear of gets posted in Script Showcase pretty quickly.

That's why it's referred to "in the dark" ;) :tongue: :goofy: *is shot*

Nicholas Steel

06-26-2007, 08:19 PM

mmm, i would have beta tested a fair bit more for a much larger period, but i prefer the good ol' 1.90 and 1.92 quests, and there were crippling bugs in the loader engine that was preventing me from playing these at all really >.>

only fairly recently was this fixed, and also i had that lag issue for a huge portion of alpha's as well, and that also was recently fixed, so yes, you may see me report bugs a lot more frequently then i did over the last few months.

Radien ZC

06-27-2007, 05:38 PM

There are some features that have been added but aren't completely bug-free, and some of those features I would very much like to use, but I definitely want a stable release.

My full opinion depends on what would need to be cut in order to churn out a stable release soon. However, one thing's for sure: I don't want ANY more new features. We really, really need a stable release. Not side-view gravity and more scripting toys.

rocksfan13

06-27-2007, 09:42 PM

I must agree with Radien. Less new stuf, more fixing.

People have been dieing for a new release of ZC. Top that off with a fixed database and we're all set. Hell I'd be happy with a working database. :)

ShadowTiger

06-28-2007, 08:32 AM

Some thoughts arise with the new .. er .. "policy." If things aren't going to be added, does this mean not implementing enemies like the Icerobe (Wizrobe-Ice) and its respective ice magic entity/sprite? Its references will be removed from the Enemy list, if they're not there already?

Also, what will happen to std.zh? It contains the line:
const int NPC_WIZZROBEICE = 153; which obviously relates to this Wizrobe, which may or may not be included. If it isn't, why should we include it in a version which would lack it?

Oh the topic of std.zh, it contains all the numbers (I.e. 153 for the WizrobeIce) for the enemy and item ID's, among many other effects. Should we also mention the expanded ID's, up to 255 or whatever, for the Custom enemies and item ID's? I.e.
const int NPC_Z154 = 154; (Though I'm not sure how renaming this enemy would affect the initial name after NPC_Z154 to reference it.) So what do you think? Should std.zh also include these expanded references just in case people want to attach a script referencing custom items, but aren't sure which numbers to use?

zcAmazing

07-02-2007, 06:12 PM

I have voted for RELEASE. I desparately want the stable release now. There are so many many bugs around. The features in suggestions will have to wait until after the stable release.

Step by step: Complete bug fixes go first. Release Candidates go second. If need of any more bug fixes, then a second Release Candidate goes third.

When all the bugs have been eliminated, a stable (final version) release goes last.

After the release of the stable, then work on the new features.

Gleeok

07-04-2007, 03:19 AM

Holy cow, i've been gone for a week and there's like a hundred new bug threads and a bunch of fixes. If I would've known it would be like this I would've voted stable. Of course it doesn't really matter much now. All's well that ends well.

...I also realized from these discussions that if a stable version was released, then a buggy beta with the new enemy editor and other features a week later, i'd be using the buggy one to build quests on. Ha, that's pretty funny.

Good work Freedom. The bugs must die.

ShadowTiger

07-07-2007, 08:23 PM

I am fully expecting a "No" on this, and I should likely encourage it.

If anyone checks Preview Mode, (Press "X" on the main ZQuest screen.) You'll find the ability to look at warp destinations. This hasn't been updated even since the multiwarp was introduced way back then. It still only has a single tile warp and a single side warp. THE side warp, in fact. The feature is incomplete not like how there are vestigial enemies in the tiles pages, but incomplete like having one arm with muscles and one arm with nothing but bone. It only half works. It can only half-way do its job. It's not for thrills and excitement; It's there to help quest makers ensure that things work the way they should. For it to be incomplete like this is more along the lines of a "bug" than something to focus away from in favor of quest-stopping bugs and the like. This can lead to quest-stopping bugs on the individual quest level.