Who wants a stable release?

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

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.

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.

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

Yes! *agrees*

majoras_wrath wrote: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?

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.

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

Amaster42 wrote: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.

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.

DarkDragon wrote: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.

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.

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?

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.

majoras_wrath wrote: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. 😎 <sorry bout that, i can't resist> ;p

Seriously though. 😉

Gleeok wrote: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. 😉

Gleeok wrote: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.

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&#37; 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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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...

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

koopa wrote:
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.

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.

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.

DarkDragon wrote: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.

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.

DarkDragon wrote:
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.

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?

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.