31 replies to this topic

[vOdToasT]

I know that once you've released three patches, you have to pay Microsoft to upload a patch, because of size. But how much would it cost?

If ANYONE knows, PLEASE tell me.

[Walker_officer]

hu? why would they pay to upload a patch? can't they just post it on petroglyph site?

I think you have to count too on what it cost to make it...1 or 2 days of work of a programmer for example...of course depending on what it's task.

...and its a good question!

[Valdez]

Walker_officer, on 23 April 2010 - 01:06 PM, said:

can't they just post it on petroglyph site?

What about GFWL validation

[vOdToasT]

Walker_officer, on 23 April 2010 - 01:06 PM, said:

hu? why would they pay to upload a patch? can't they just post it on petroglyph site?

I think you have to count too on what it cost to make it...1 or 2 days of work of a programmer for example...of course depending on what it's task.

...and its a good question!

No, I'm NOT talking about how much it takes to MAKE a patch. I'm talking about how much microsoft takes to put a patch up on windows live.

Edited by vOdToasT, 23 April 2010 - 01:11 PM.

[Walker_officer]

ok, i get it...
but why do you want to know only that? have you done a patch?

[Kelathin]

Walker_officer, on 23 April 2010 - 01:06 PM, said:

hu? why would they pay to upload a patch? can't they just post it on petroglyph site?!

Because if they did, GFWL would treat it like a mod, and you couldn't play online?

[JAGX]

They charge you to upload it on GWFL?  That's gay... idk if they charge for Xbox Live, but the cert process takes forever... but Petro abandoned UaW so I doubt they'll release one, or respond lol.

Edited by JAGX, 24 April 2010 - 01:58 AM.

[Catblender]

JAGX, on 24 April 2010 - 01:57 AM, said:

They charge you to upload it on GWFL? That's gay...

As far as I know, fees for patches are what killed this game. Unless I'm wrong.

JAGX, on 24 April 2010 - 01:57 AM, said:

idk if they charge for Xbox Live, but the cert process takes forever...

LOL, isn't that the same for PC?

Edited by Catblender, 24 April 2010 - 05:51 AM.

[vOdToasT]

If the cost is based on the size of the patch, which makes sense, since the bigger is is, the more costs Microsoft, then a small patch would be really cheap!

All we would need are more maps (which we could make ourselves), which is really small, and a slight modification to the netcode to make disconnect = loss, and then reset the leaderboards.

This patch would take very little space, so if the cost is based on size, it would be very cheap.

Then we could raise a donation fund

Edited by vOdToasT, 24 April 2010 - 10:45 PM.

[Catblender]

vOdToasT, on 24 April 2010 - 10:45 PM, said:

Then we could raise a donation fund

Well, gotta get Petro and Sega to agree first, otherwise, the fund raising will be for naught.

[Gray__Fox]

JAGX, on 24 April 2010 - 01:57 AM, said:

They charge you to upload it on GWFL?  That's gay... idk if they charge for Xbox Live, but the cert process takes forever... but Petro abandoned UaW so I doubt they'll release one, or respond lol.

Gee I wouldn't be so negative and F-Petro about it, last we all heard was there was another patch done and ready to go. Sega owns the IP from my last understanding, they're the publisher and holder of anything that does or does not happen to the game series. Petroglyph could waste valuable time and resources making patches, talk to Sega until they're blue in the face and unless Sega wants to do anything with it nothing will happen. Just because petro hasn't done something stupid (like release a patch) that could cause consequences for it's business doesn't mean they don't care. Look at Tilted Mill they wanted to do an exp pack for Children of the Nile but never had the opportunity to until they made enough games to make enough dough to go independent, then they bought the rights to Children of the Nile and made that expansion pack. (which rocks BTW)

In some ways I hope petro does this.

[Preda]

which one is the third patch? I have uaw_day1, uaw_patch2 and appPatch on my pc, and I remember that one of them was partially-complete when I got it, and still had lots of bugs.

Has petro fixed the DirectX 10 suppoort? my game always crashed because of DX10, I had to switch it off.

[vOdToasT]

Performance with Dirext X 10 is still crap, so no, you still have to turn it off. I think there have been three patches for UaW.

[JAGX]

Gray__Fox, on 24 April 2010 - 11:59 PM, said:

Gee I wouldn't be so negative and F-Petro about it, last we all heard was there was another patch done and ready to go.

Link?

That'd be great, but I doubt it's true.  I have some of the devs on my F-list, and I never seem them on UaW, not that they have to be online to play, but idk how they'd balance it without some playtesting against a lot of players...

[vOdToasT]

If they made another patch it wouldn't balance anything. It would make the game less balanced, since they always listen to the requests of the players.

[Strategist]

vOdToasT, on 27 April 2010 - 07:48 AM, said:

If they made another patch it wouldn't balance anything. It would make the game less balanced, since they always listen to the requests of the players.

Depends on what sort of suggestions are accepted.

For example, on FI spam I would just adjust the damage-types so it doesn't have a bonus against every unit-type (it's bonus to infantry I would change from 1.40 or so to 0.50, leaving the others alone) rather than nerf it directly in it's unit stats. Dervish would probably benefit from a slightly higher anti-aircraft bonus to give Novus some other anti-air options. Also, fixing Founder's health regeneration would probably be not a bad idea.

Masari seem more or less balanced I think.

The Hierarchy mainly needs some minior economic adjustments around their walkers (perhaps some cost reductions on hardpoints, mainly on the Habitat). Hierarchy units themselves are more or less balanced.

[vOdToasT]

The only big balance problem is the maps. Some maps are pretty broken in the wrong matchups.

About the Habitat walker, their use depends on the map. On some maps they're pretty worthless in all matchups, but on others, they're useful vs Novus and Hierarchy (Yes, Hierarchy, but like I said, they're WORTHLESS vs Hierarchy on the wrong maps). On the maps where they aren't good, though, they really are NOT good.

[Valdez]

Strategist, on 27 April 2010 - 10:52 AM, said:

The Hierarchy mainly needs some minior economic adjustments around their walkers (perhaps some cost reductions on hardpoints, mainly on the Habitat). Hierarchy units themselves are more or less balanced.

Its not so bad if you're in a cow map IIRC. Otherwise, yeah...

[JAGX]

vOdToasT, on 27 April 2010 - 07:48 AM, said:

If they made another patch it wouldn't balance anything. It would make the game less balanced, since they always listen to the requests of the players.

Really?  That's funny, seeing as how the previous times I spoke with Delphi, he agreed with me as I ran him over using Defiler spam (pre-patch) I told him I did that to show him they were imba, and he said to me that I should enjoy it while it lasts.

Without listening to the players (who basically play-test the game at the highest levels, as devs usually suck at their own games compared to fans), then there's no point in a patch.  And all of the previous patches took input from players and produced this version of the game which you hail as perfectly balanced, so logically the next patch would do exactly the same thing.  The only point of contention I have is that no game is perfectly balanced--least of all UaW.  Patches will only refine the game, if they are made.  And listening to the community got us here, why not listen more?

Valdez, on 27 April 2010 - 11:11 AM, said:

Its not so bad if you're in a cow map IIRC. Otherwise, yeah...

True, but then again, everything is good on dairy farm maps.  You could get enough $$$ to spam virtually anything, and I would prefer Assembly on cow maps simply because it's units are faster + more flexible.

Edited by JAGX, 27 April 2010 - 12:41 PM.

[Walker_officer]

I would love to see something done when there are no more resources to build your army in the skirmish mode, something like a small fee each minute or when you do something honorably like destroying 10 units without losing one of your own. (Maybe new achievements? An higher one would be: Destroy 50 and loose only 5 )

I come across this problems many times when playing (one of the reason I stop playing skirmish), I like to play hours long but when this happens no cpu opponent or allied leaves their base, they only shoot special weapons making it a boring match that finally comes to an end.