Quote Originally Posted by franpa View Post
The backup system should have no limit on the number of backups that can be created at any time. Instead of having say a total of 10 backups, the limit should be set to 9,999,999,999 backups.
That would be the worst thing ever. Imagine when people start complaining that they have 200 Gigs of backups, and now they don't have any room for other stuff!

Anyway. Let me tell you this. It's been a long long time since I needed to use one of the backups, and I've had timed backups turned off for a long time (since they're so obtrusive). I'm far more worried about corruption in my ZC.sav file than in my quests.

Obviously, it's still a concern down the road, so perhaps a better proposal tuned to the way I suspect most people work (Open ZQuest, modify quest, save, open ZC, test, F6 quit, modify quest, save, test, etc.) is in order:

Create a "special" backup when the quest is opened or saved the first time in a session, and set it aside. Then, each time you save, create a normal backup. If you notice corruption, you can roll back to the speical backup which will be there forever, if you never close ZQuest.

Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
I've been playing around with 1099 the last few days and find it to be far from anywhere close to bug free.
Why the 1099 you ask, because the 1121 crashes every 5 minutes.

Jman said the new betas were close to bug free...
which versions would those be?

It's a bug infested piece of....
well you know the rest, it ain't bug free, it's just not getting tested anymore because you ran all the testers off when they realized they weren't going to get rewarded for their hard work with a stable release.

been what.... 3 years now?

there's my rant.... I'll check back again in another 50 versions or so, good luck.
As for bugs in the engine, I agree that it's not bugfree. And, more than the "it will never be bug free, stop bitching" level, too. And, more than it was the last time you posted this thread. However, I trust they will stop making large sweeping changes, and focus on fixing bugs soon, right?

Anyway, I always run the latest beta, so that I can find bugs and report them. Anyone running an old beta is not doing anyone a favour by doing so. Bugs get fixed, new ones get introduced, it's the cycle of software development! *cue lion king music*

I don't find this extended period between releases particularly bad for two reasons:

1. We're getting interim builds to test stuff and report bugs, because...
2. Previous releases have not exactly been bug-free. Everyone of them has had show-stopping bugs (the crash-the-second-time-you-look-at-the-map bug, the DMap continue bug, the midi-instruments-are-fucked bug) which I don't want to see in an eventual 2.5 release.

Okay, random stream of thoughts, over.