bigessess

New versions vs old save files, please update

Recommended Posts

I would like the new versions to be less destructive to old save files

Tables are embedded in the big rock spikes that you cant dig

The habitat pad has been turned into a death trap with deadly plants that can not be removed, if you are not running when you eject so that you come out at an angle, the plant is in range to attack

too-much-lol.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game's in early access. Saves won't be stable across versions, there's no way to fix that as the game continues to move forward. Six more months to go! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

of course there is no way to fix it, how would you regenerate what I did manually.

the request is for future versions to not destroy old saves

that can be done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not suggesting there'd be a fix, I mean keeping saves 100% stable as content and systems are modified shouldn't be a priority vs getting everything running smoothly. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree

Games where the idea is to create save files... like this … a group of friends do something as a group... suddenly its all gone because of an update?

See, I get it that not all things can go forward, but this is not a 2 hour start to finish type game. It is something people build on and invest time in.

While it is important to go forward, it is also important not to destroy hours of time the players have invested. There is a line, and we are not yet close enough to it to see it

Old versions open old saves without regenerating the terrain and destroying what was done, updated versions can be just a little easier to old saves than they currently are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This game has been in alpha for a little over a year and a half now. 1.0 release is in 6 months or less. This should have been fixed ages ago...

 

On 6/19/2018 at 4:32 AM, Blind Io said:

I'm not suggesting there'd be a fix, I mean keeping saves 100% stable as content and systems are modified shouldn't be a priority vs getting everything running smoothly. 

 

Keeping saves 100% stable IS part of getting everything running smoothly...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly, even fully-released games have a very difficult time keeping old saves 100% compatible with new version. if the content changes enough (and it does change a ton during alpha/beta, and you shouldn't play alpha/beta games if you're expecting a consistent or persistent experience), there's pretty much no way to expect the devs to make the mechanics backward compatible. won't happen, even, when the mechanic has been changed significantly.

that said, even fully released games 'break' saves on updates. minecraft saves have broken several times in their dozen-or-so updates since their 1.0. "don't starve" keeps adding content that requires a new save to access (and that game's far more annoying than anything else to lose a save because of slow start and permadeath). 

i wouldn't expect to keep astroneer saves across updates until at LEAST 1.0, possibly longer as the roadmap becomes reality. too much of the very core of the game is still being worked on, and when you change the core sufficiently it *can't* be kept fully backwards... it's a coding impossibility

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

100%.. 100% … so many people saying 100%

I only ask for an improvement from horrible to better

It is not THAT it broke, it is HOW it broke... The things that happened were not a necessary result of a change in mechanics, it is something that could be taken care of in the future for the most part anyway

...edit...

Look at the picture I posted, and do tell me, in what version is it ok for that to happen to a base? It simply should not happen ever, and if it does, it should be looked into

Edited by bigessess

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it'll definitely go from 'horrible' to 'perfect compatibility' when they're finished building the very base of the game. as it is, keeping the old code AND the new code will only cripple development as they try to make 2 clashing codes still attempt to coexist. once the very core of the game is done, slower development is to be expected as they need to do less work on the whole, and can instead laser-focus on working new content in without breaking old content (hence also slower updates with less content in a 'finished' software vs a 'beta' software). 

what happened to your base looks like a change to the terrain engine between versions. not normal, but also not to be unexpected. i can show you about a half dozen minecraft worlds of mine that got viciously broken by terrain-generating changes over the years (all post-release, as well). there's a reason for their frequent disclaimer in patch notes to start a fresh save: things like that can and will happen, and they can't push the game forward if they worry about deprecating foundational code that's since been improved. 

i've had a lot of worlds get broken like that since i started playing over a year ago... it's just a hazard of the early access. sometimes we just gotta set off a 21 dynamite/firework salute and dig in to a fresh world, and look forward to that day in less than a year when worlds will be persistent for much more vast amounts of time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bigessess said:

Look at the picture I posted, and do tell me, in what version is it ok for that to happen to a base? 

Any version before 1.0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, vvhorus said:

This should have been fixed ages ago...

That's what you think, but it's not what is realistic.
They try to keep saves as compatible as possible, but you can't expect them to do everything humanly possible to make certain that it does work (well, you can expect it, but you'll just disappoint yourself). That'd be a waste of development time and bad usage of the Early Access time. And many are not gonna miss their old save after an update anyway. Like, I don't even try to play on it. New update, new stuff, fresh start. That's how it should be for the best experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this thread keeps getting derailed with the numbers

It is supposed to be a request for a little more attention, not a demand for perfection

Something happened while playing, I reported it where I was asked, lets not roll this ball down the wrong hill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Wyvyrias said:

That's what you think, but it's not what is realistic.
They try to keep saves as compatible as possible, but you can't expect them to do everything humanly possible to make certain that it does work (well, you can expect it, but you'll just disappoint yourself). That'd be a waste of development time and bad usage of the Early Access time. And many are not gonna miss their old save after an update anyway. Like, I don't even try to play on it. New update, new stuff, fresh start. That's how it should be for the best experience.

You can excuse and justify their lack of "anything" all you want, but the reality is that this is a feature that needs attention before release. Maybe they need to hire more experienced coders in their team?

Again, don't mean to sound like a d*ck, but, as a paying customer–like every other paying customer–I expect the product I purchase to work 100% right, or at least in an acceptable manner. Otherwise, I would return it and get another product that worked. It is a reasonable expectation. Right now, the state of save games after an update is not in an acceptable place. If SES can't deliver a product that, at the very least, saves game progression properly, they need to re-evaluate why they're doing this or if they're biting more than they can chew...

A player spends a lot of time and energy building a base the way they want it, then comes an update and all that effort gets ruined in a single download. It's demoralizing and frustrating to feel that you wasted your time doing something that is eventually going to be ruined the next time an update comes in. I personally haven't played the game since the little patch was sent out. Seeing the base that I spent an entire weekend creating all to my liking being littered with crap really demoralized me. This issue is going to piss a lot of people off come release time if not addressed before then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, vvhorus said:

Again, don't mean to sound like a d*ck, but, as a paying customer–like every other paying customer–I expect the product I purchase to work 100% right, or at least in an acceptable manner.

But you ...do....

If you expect things to work %100 on an early access game, well that is your fault. Not saying that you don't deserve frustration over wasting your time when updates break your stuff, but when you bought the game you should have understood this stuff happens all the time through the development process. Don't get me wrong, I have been so bothered by wasting time with the early access side of the game I have just not touched it in months - but man, it is in development. Things will break and fix and break again during this time. It is the way early access always is. Also, granted, sometimes the mods can be a little flippant, but after dealing with people angry-typing for hours about how a game in development isn't working properly (again, really no surprise) I understand that can get a little frustrating.

And all the anger about save games, fundamental changes are being made, save games can't all be nursed. If you spend 100 hours on a base in a game that will change - again, that is your fault. Chances are it will break, and whether or not that pisses you off, you have been told about 1 million times about it.

All the anger and derisive comments about how the game is broken should be cached until after release - it is a boom/bust process software development, and again it is difficult for everyone to understand this. If the game still breaks your save after launch, we should all write back then in the angry and entitled way we are doing now.

Geesh. Just needed to vent that becasue of all the unprofessional engagement and seemingly clueless early-access purchasers I see whining on here. That is right, we all share blame here. Buying early access is essentially paying to be part part of the QA process. You are a customer, but your product was not in any way guaranteed to work until launch (check all the platform guidelines about this). It doesn't matter when we think things should have been fixed, the development process is theirs, not ours. We don't work there. Remember that.

Wait until launch. If it is still the god-awful mess you are all screaming it is from behind your monitors, let them have it then. Now you just seem petulant.

Tip of the hat to y'all. Have a good day!

Edited by BLEDHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, vvhorus said:

I expect the product I purchase to work 100% right, or at least in an acceptable manner. Otherwise, I would return it and get another product that worked. It is a reasonable expectation.

It would be reasonable if the game would be being marketed as 100%, too.
But it's Early Access.

Again, everything could remain broken and suddenly be fixed with the 1.0 release, and it still would be technically perfectly fine. The actual issue is: Not seeing any fixes prior to that, of course, would discourage people (such as you, in this case), who assume this won't be fixed anymore, because that's just how people are.
But since we don't know what 1.0 actually brings, or what will even happen in the time before it, complaining about phantom-issues is all that can be done. It's frustration, an emotion, but nothing that brings progress. It's something we all have, but none of us needs.

And let's not pick up this whole "I paid for a product, I expect this and that". That's just another vague idea that cannot be precisely defined anyway...because technically you already got your product, being aware that it still needs work. How long it will remain "in work" and how much will actually change was never your responsibility. It's just an idea that you were aware of (or should have been, but that's irrelevant for what it actually is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2018 at 8:48 AM, vvhorus said:

This should have been fixed ages ago

It is an Alpha game. This is an important distinction. You are not playing a full static game. And, even as a released game, as long as there are patched and updated, this process will happen again. It is almost impossible from a programming stand point to maintain save consistency between patches in a flexible, sand box, construction based game like Astroneer. Thinking otherwise is just a dream.

On 6/20/2018 at 8:48 AM, vvhorus said:

Keeping saves 100% stable IS part of getting everything running smoothly...

Not even Minecraft, one of the largest, most financially success games of all times, can do this. For a game to be able to do this, the game should be very restrictive or static. For example, games where you cannot change the layout of the very land can do this, because there are way more restriction than games like Astroneer, where the possibilities are ginormous.

On 6/20/2018 at 7:36 PM, bigessess said:

It is supposed to be a request for a little more attention, not a demand for perfection

I agree that they should focus on stability, but keep in mind that, one there is no point when they are still fixing things like the terrain or updating it. Two, just the size of possibilities are just too big to be handle properly. It is almost impossible to determine how a single digit in a code can affect the terrain. This an inherent problem of games like this. It usually comes to two things: big meaningful content and bug fixing patches or just performance, bug fixing, patches. You cannot have the first without having the risk of screwing you save file. 

10 hours ago, vvhorus said:

I expect the product I purchase to work 100% right, or at least in an acceptable manner.

I'm too, but sadly, this is not a finished product. And if you buy an unfinished product, knowing very well that is not finished, you buy something that it is literally not finished. You cannot expect for an unfinished product to work in an acceptable manner before is, well, finished. Once it is finished, feel free to complain about not working properly if it still does. But for now, play it knowing that you are going to have problems because it is not a finished game. 

10 hours ago, vvhorus said:

A player spends a lot of time and energy building a base the way they want it, then comes an update and all that effort gets ruined in a single download.

I hope that you are really aware by my redundant previous sentences that this is not a finished game. It is 100% obvious that after an update all your work has the possibility to be ruined. Now, I hope that the programmers learns about Minecraft and allows players to play the game under a particular patch, so that that effort is not wasted. And add a warning when a big update comes out about the possibility of that patch ruining a save.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Wyvyrias said:

It would be reasonable if the game would be being marketed as 100%, too.
But it's Early Access.

Again, everything could remain broken and suddenly be fixed with the 1.0 release, and it still would be technically perfectly fine. The actual issue is: Not seeing any fixes prior to that, of course, would discourage people (such as you, in this case), who assume this won't be fixed anymore, because that's just how people are.
But since we don't know what 1.0 actually brings, or what will even happen in the time before it, complaining about phantom-issues is all that can be done. It's frustration, an emotion, but nothing that brings progress. It's something we all have, but none of us needs.

And let's not pick up this whole "I paid for a product, I expect this and that". That's just another vague idea that cannot be precisely defined anyway...because technically you already got your product, being aware that it still needs work. How long it will remain "in work" and how much will actually change was never your responsibility. It's just an idea that you were aware of (or should have been, but that's irrelevant for what it actually is).

 

12 hours ago, Chepelink said:

It is an Alpha game. This is an important distinction. You are not playing a full static game. And, even as a released game, as long as there are patched and updated, this process will happen again. It is almost impossible from a programming stand point to maintain save consistency between patches in a flexible, sand box, construction based game like Astroneer. Thinking otherwise is just a dream.

Not even Minecraft, one of the largest, most financially success games of all times, can do this. For a game to be able to do this, the game should be very restrictive or static. For example, games where you cannot change the layout of the very land can do this, because there are way more restriction than games like Astroneer, where the possibilities are ginormous.

I agree that they should focus on stability, but keep in mind that, one there is no point when they are still fixing things like the terrain or updating it. Two, just the size of possibilities are just too big to be handle properly. It is almost impossible to determine how a single digit in a code can affect the terrain. This an inherent problem of games like this. It usually comes to two things: big meaningful content and bug fixing patches or just performance, bug fixing, patches. You cannot have the first without having the risk of screwing you save file. 

I'm too, but sadly, this is not a finished product. And if you buy an unfinished product, knowing very well that is not finished, you buy something that it is literally not finished. You cannot expect for an unfinished product to work in an acceptable manner before is, well, finished. Once it is finished, feel free to complain about not working properly if it still does. But for now, play it knowing that you are going to have problems because it is not a finished game. 

I hope that you are really aware by my redundant previous sentences that this is not a finished game. It is 100% obvious that after an update all your work has the possibility to be ruined. Now, I hope that the programmers learns about Minecraft and allows players to play the game under a particular patch, so that that effort is not wasted. And add a warning when a big update comes out about the possibility of that patch ruining a save.

To both of you:

First, I don't play Minecraft. I could care less about its shortcomings. If SES strives to release a game and justify its shortcomings because other games have them, like some people here are suggesting, well, that is extremely sad and only shows the level of their commitment...

Second, the game has been in early access for more than a year and a half. Plenty of time to work on bugs. This is one BIG ONE that has been neglected or ignored so far, at least publicly. The game will cease to be early access in 6 months. The game will become a "finished product" in December. Will this be fixed by then? Is this something that's in the plans? That is all I want to know. If it's not going to be fixed, I want to also know so I can move on. I'm not wasting an additional minute on this game if I know that this issue is going to remain as-is come release. It is THAT important to me. And if you think I'm alone, you'd be surprised...

 

22 hours ago, BLEDHA said:

But you ...do....

If you expect things to work %100 on an early access game, well that is your fault. Not saying that you don't deserve frustration over wasting your time when updates break your stuff, but when you bought the game you should have understood this stuff happens all the time through the development process. Don't get me wrong, I have been so bothered by wasting time with the early access side of the game I have just not touched it in months - but man, it is in development. Things will break and fix and break again during this time. It is the way early access always is. Also, granted, sometimes the mods can be a little flippant, but after dealing with people angry-typing for hours about how a game in development isn't working properly (again, really no surprise) I understand that can get a little frustrating.

And all the anger about save games, fundamental changes are being made, save games can't all be nursed. If you spend 100 hours on a base in a game that will change - again, that is your fault. Chances are it will break, and whether or not that pisses you off, you have been told about 1 million times about it.

All the anger and derisive comments about how the game is broken should be cached until after release - it is a boom/bust process software development, and again it is difficult for everyone to understand this. If the game still breaks your save after launch, we should all write back then in the angry and entitled way we are doing now.

Geesh. Just needed to vent that becasue of all the unprofessional engagement and seemingly clueless early-access purchasers I see whining on here. That is right, we all share blame here. Buying early access is essentially paying to be part part of the QA process. You are a customer, but your product was not in any way guaranteed to work until launch (check all the platform guidelines about this). It doesn't matter when we think things should have been fixed, the development process is theirs, not ours. We don't work there. Remember that.

Wait until launch. If it is still the god-awful mess you are all screaming it is from behind your monitors, let them have it then. Now you just seem petulant.

Tip of the hat to y'all. Have a good day!

I've been a gamer since I was 6 years old in the mid '70s. I know what early access is. It's a period where developers LISTEN TO THEIR COMMUNITY to fix bugs before release. This one, however, has been ignored, neglected, bypassed, fallen through the cracks (pun intended), whatever you want to call it, for more than a year and a half that this game has been out in Alpha.

Like I said: it's 6 months to release, crunch time. As a paying customer I ask once again: will this issue be fixed before launch? I will not recommend this game to anyone if I feel people will be as frustrated and disappointed as I have. I can't conscientiously recommend anyone spending their hard-earned money on a game that is going to break saved games every time an update is released...

Edited by vvhorus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vvhorus said:

I could care less about its shortcomings.

The phrase goes "I couldn't care less. I wonder why people keep saying the opposite.

2 hours ago, vvhorus said:

As a paying customer I ask once again: 

Please drop the "as paying customer" already. Everyone here invested time and/or money into the game. Pointing out you paid isn't going to make your question any more relevant: We know you invested something. We all did.

2 hours ago, vvhorus said:

will this issue be fixed before launch? I will not recommend this game to anyone if I feel people will be as frustrated and disappointed as I have. I can't conscientiously recommend anyone spending their hard-earned money on a game that is going to break saved games every time an update is released...

Before launch? Maybe.
At launch? Surely.

Again, it's Early Access, whether you think "Early Access is just an excuse" is absolutely irrelevant for reality. As long as this phase persists, you must expect serious bugs, especially for things such as saving progress, which essentially means not only saving, but also translating existing progress into new versions, which is where the breaking point is. If you cannot accept those facts, for your own sanity, drop the game until v1.0 arrives and save yourself some frustration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, vvhorus said:

First, I don't play Minecraft. I could care less about its shortcomings.

When we talked about Minecraft we are not interested in their shortcomings or point them out. What we meant is that EVEN a game of the magnitude of Minecraft, with way more resources than SES (being man power or monetary) cannot do it. If you have been gaming since you were 6 you might know the difference between a big budget title and a smaller one. We just pointed out one, if not the, most famous examples of the genre that Astroneer is in.

3 hours ago, vvhorus said:

Plenty of time to work on bugs. This is one BIG ONE that has been neglected or ignored so far, at least publicly

Yes, but, it may sound weird to you, but this IS NOT A BUG. That it may have bugs in it, yes, it is totally possible, but it is not a bug in itself. It is a consequence of the type of game they are making. Pick the planet Terra (i think that is the name), is it exactly the same planet every time you play a new game to the smallest atom? No, it is not. This add a layer of possibilities that makes it very hard, if not impossible, to predict. Can you deform the land in the planet? Yes, you can and you must. This adds another  layer of complexity. Is the land box shaped (cubes) or it is more dynamic? More complexity.

The only way SES can protect the saves is that they don't add any significant patches, particularly about how the ground physics and world generator work. When they add patches that add new biomes, new improvements to the world generator and physics, to improve textures and so on, there is a risk that the changes affects the current save file. Why? It is not because of a bug, it is because very small changes can, for example, clip objects into the ground. This is because the collision boxes (oversimplification) are not the same as before because of the patch. 

Now, you may ask, why they don't fix it? Well, there is not going to be an universal fix. They may try to predict how the objects are going react to the change. That is why you see sometimes that objects falls after loading. They are trying to adjust the model to the new physics and terrain elements. But it is impossible in a humanly time frame to predict 100% how the objects are going to behave and have countermeasures against it. This is why any game that is as complex as Astroneer (for example, Minecraft) warns the player that updating may alter the saves. It is not that they don't want to fix it, I mean, happy customers are returning customers, but it is an impossible task to fix 100% for the time frame. 

2 hours ago, vvhorus said:

I know what early access is. It's a period where developers LISTEN TO THEIR COMMUNITY to fix bugs before release.

It is an early access, but it is in its Alpha stage, therefore, it is still in its content creation part of the game. When it enters the Beta stage, it is when they are going to focus solely in fixing bugs before release. Why? because things change so much in the Alpha stages that fixing most of the bugs are a monumental waste of time. A bug that they fix it today, may not even be relevant tomorrow after a small change. I've been playing since I was 5 on the original Street Fighter 1 arcade back in the mid 80's (I don't know if that is relevant, but you pointed out your gaming experience) and I know more or less the difference between Alpha and Beta. I hope that a veteran like you would have a bit more understanding on how games progress since you have been playing way long before me. 

2 hours ago, vvhorus said:

As a paying customer I ask once again: will this issue be fixed before launch?

I'll ask you, what do you prefer? Just bug fixing and performance patches or content patches (with bug and performance patches included)? If you want the first and not the second, absolutely, it be rare to have that problem after launch.  But the second, no, you won't have that luxury in its totality. As I pointed out before, they may try to fix it, but is not going to be stable 100% of the time.

Edited by Chepelink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, vvhorus said:

Like I said: it's 6 months to release, crunch time. As a paying customer I ask once again: will this issue be fixed before launch? I will not recommend this game to anyone if I feel people will be as frustrated and disappointed as I have. I can't conscientiously recommend anyone spending their hard-earned money on a game that is going to break saved games every time an update is released...

So save that concern and wait until launch, you are just being antagonistic now by being so hostile becasue your saves haven't been working. Mine either, it sucks, I hear you. Still, I read that they won't each update during EA, so I am not pissed off or feel like I am being screwed. You know, because this was clearly stated to me.

I understand the game is almost at launch, but still isn't launched. Since you understand early access after all of your years of gaming, you know your expectations - just like your anger - are a little premature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other side of things....

1 hour ago, Wyvyrias said:

The phrase goes "I couldn't care less. I wonder why people keep saying the opposite. 

I am not sure if you work directly for SES or not (I don't know the staff roster) but I know you moderate - and this is not the way you should speak to clients who support a company through development even if they are being unrealistic and angry. Flippant and arrogant responses make the company seem like they don't give a darn, and justifies the further anger. If you are the (  or a) face of the company here, you shouldn't sink to the level of the anger and petulance of the customers, if you can't reason with them, brush them off and ignore. Otherwise you just fuel the fire. A modicum of professionalism goes a long way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wyvyrias said:

The phrase goes "I couldn't care less. I wonder why people keep saying the opposite.

Please drop the "as paying customer" already. Everyone here invested time and/or money into the game. Pointing out you paid isn't going to make your question any more relevant: We know you invested something. We all did.

Before launch? Maybe.
At launch? Surely.

Again, it's Early Access, whether you think "Early Access is just an excuse" is absolutely irrelevant for reality. As long as this phase persists, you must expect serious bugs, especially for things such as saving progress, which essentially means not only saving, but also translating existing progress into new versions, which is where the breaking point is. If you cannot accept those facts, for your own sanity, drop the game until v1.0 arrives and save yourself some frustration.

1. Really? Are you going to go as low as to criticize my grammar? English is not my native language. Even though I've been bilingual most of my life, I do not claim to know all the nuances of the English language. Besides, going after my grammar does not contribute to the discussion, nor make your argument more or less valid than mine.

2. I will not drop my comment, as it is a valid one. I AM a paying customer who deserves your and SES's respect and gratitude. Thanks to me and to the other paying customers, you have been granted the "privilege" to moderate this forum, and SES has been given the resources and vote of confidence to continue with their little project. Do not forget that, as that is the truth, even if it hurts. Maybe the ones absent from this whole conversation (SES themselves) also need a little reminder.

3. I am far from angry. What I am is frustrated and disappointed at the lack of transparency and interest from SES to address their own community, and at the eagerness of some here in the community to excuse and justify those actions or lack thereof. I only want clear answers to my questions, not a "maybe" or "surely" from someone who does not know. If you are unable to provide those answers, or just speculating, the best course of action would be to take those questions to the people who can give you a clear response, and relay it back to us. As the forum moderator with direct access to SES, I thought that was part of your responsibilities: to bring the concerns of the community to the development team.

One more thing: I'm following your suggestion and not logging in to the game until an official announcement has been released stating that this issue has either been acknowledged by SES or has been resolved, even if it's all the way in December. This issue is very important to me, and I'm sure to many others as well, even if they are not voicing their opinions here.

Keep justifying mediocrity. You are doing one hell of a job! 👏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Chepelink said:

Yes, but, it may sound weird to you, but this IS NOT A BUG. That it may have bugs in it, yes, it is totally possible, but it is not a bug in itself. It is a consequence of the type of game they are making. Pick the planet Terra (i think that is the name), is it exactly the same planet every time you play a new game to the smallest atom? No, it is not. This add a layer of possibilities that makes it very hard, if not impossible, to predict. Can you deform the land in the planet? Yes, you can and you must. This adds another  layer of complexity. Is the land box shaped (cubes) or it is more dynamic? More complexity.

The only way SES can protect the saves is that they don't add any significant patches, particularly about how the ground physics and world generator work. When they add patches that add new biomes, new improvements to the world generator and physics, to improve textures and so on, there is a risk that the changes affects the current save file. Why? It is not because of a bug, it is because very small changes can, for example, clip objects into the ground. This is because the collision boxes (oversimplification) are not the same as before because of the patch. 

Now, you may ask, why they don't fix it? Well, there is not going to be an universal fix. They may try to predict how the objects are going react to the change. That is why you see sometimes that objects falls after loading. They are trying to adjust the model to the new physics and terrain elements. But it is impossible in a humanly time frame to predict 100% how the objects are going to behave and have countermeasures against it. This is why any game that is as complex as Astroneer (for example, Minecraft) warns the player that updating may alter the saves. It is not that they don't want to fix it, I mean, happy customers are returning customers, but it is an impossible task to fix 100% for the time frame. 

Maybe they need to push back the game release until such a time they are able to figure out a viable solution? Are they biting more than they could chew?

3 hours ago, Chepelink said:

It is an early access, but it is in its Alpha stage, therefore, it is still in its content creation part of the game. When it enters the Beta stage, it is when they are going to focus solely in fixing bugs before release. Why? because things change so much in the Alpha stages that fixing most of the bugs are a monumental waste of time. A bug that they fix it today, may not even be relevant tomorrow after a small change.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but SES has not announced any beta periods that I know of. Even in their development roadmap there's no mention of any beta period. We're going from alpha straight to release, as far as I know. SES could be, for all we know, be hard at work on other bugs, creating brand new content, or slacking off and shooting hoops in the parking lot. That lack of communication is what's really bugging me. Sure, this and other issues needs to be resolved to any acceptable degree, but the apparent lack of communication by the developers is definitely frustrating.

3 hours ago, Chepelink said:

I'll ask you, what do you prefer? Just bug fixing and performance patches or content patches (with bug and performance patches included)? If you want the first and not the second, absolutely, it be rare to have that problem after launch.  But the second, no, you won't have that luxury in its totality. As I pointed out before, they may try to fix it, but is not going to be stable 100% of the time.

I would honestly prefer to play a game that, at launch, has no issues, or at least the ones that will inevitably pop up are not game-breaking. The ability of not being able to save a game without it being broken when a patch gets released is pretty bad. Do you think I'm being unreasonable and harsh now? Wait until the game releases and hordes of really angry players flood these forums, Steam's, Twitter and Facebook demanding action. What will SES do then? Will they claim that they didn't know about it and scramble to find solutions? Who knows.

Dude, nothing personal against anyone here. I just want a straight answer from someone in the know, not a bunch of irrelevant explanations, speculations or justifications. Is that so hard to get?

Edited by vvhorus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, vvhorus said:

Maybe they need to push back the game release until such a time they are able to figure out a viable solution? Are they biting more than they could chew?

I can't think of a way to explain to you the nature of the beast.  It seems that you don't understand basic concepts about  complexity. I already told you that, as long as they don't make patches that alter world's generation and similar, they already have a viable save system. Thus, you don't have to worry about saving as long as they don't alter the physics of the world. They are fine. But, on the other hand, if they improve the physics of the world and world generation, you can expect to have problems with your saves. That is the nature of the beast.

Now, what you understand for viable may be just enough, as bigessess said:

On 6/20/2018 at 7:36 PM, bigessess said:

It is supposed to be a request for a little more attention, not a demand for perfection

The save system right now is not perfect, and never is going to be perfect. I'm not a game developer, I'm just a software developer. What I can say to you is, the more complex a system is, the more unknown states that a software has, the harder is to anticipate for all things. For example, breaking a moon in half. That is something that I've never thought about it. It is just an insane amount of work to do for my taste. And breaking the moon in half is a state of the game that the developers might or might not have considered. How many ways do you think that a moon can be split in half? How many forms do you think you can alter the terrain in your home base? How do you expect that share amount of variables to be predicted every single patch to obtain a perfect recovery save system that adapts to the modification of the save file? What they can do is to try to adjust the models the best they can, and that is it. Expect to have problems once in a while. It is not that they are going to change the world generator and models every month after launch. 

1 hour ago, vvhorus said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but SES has not announced any beta periods that I know of. Even in their development roadmap there's no mention of any beta period.

I cannot answer that for them, but the labels in the game are pretty clear: Alpha state. They can do a open beta, a closed beta or both; it is their choice. If they expect to launch by December, they should have already thought about a Beta period. If I have to guess, it'll be after terrain 2.0. Where the only majors changes are about game models and not world generator. 

1 hour ago, vvhorus said:

the apparent lack of communication by the developers is definitely frustrating

It is very hard to address the public in a way that pleases everyone. For a great example, you. I already told you last post (the post you quoted) the complexity about saves and patches and how it is an impossible task for any human right now. And you continue saying things like "Are they biting more than they could chew?". You are the one that does not understand about what is going on. You already stated that you don't care about what happens in other games (Minecraft). You don't seems to have the slightest introspection on why we talk about other games. You seems to think that everything has a solution, when in the software world, it does not. We have thing as simple as adding one plus one, and complex thing algorithms with a NP-complete, NP-hard and so on complexity. So, what is the point for them to tell you, "it is going to be fine", if you are not going to take their words? How do you expect for devs to come here and deal with "I'm a paying customer" cries? They have way better things to do that to address things like that. Why? because they know that it is a very complex task and that a complete solution has not come out yet.

Do I like for them to talk more to the community? Yes, of course. But if I were them, I probably would not. Think for a second what do you think is going to happen if someone from the dev team answer ONE question. Suddenly they are going to be bombarded with hundreds of questions, hundreds of suggestions, hundreds of every thing, and everyone would feel entitle for an answer from the devs. 

1 hour ago, vvhorus said:

The ability of not being able to save a game without it being broken when a patch gets released is pretty bad.

You don't have to worry about it. Not all patches are going to break the saves. I think you'll get a fair amount of patches before one patch appears that has the potential to break the save.

 

Edited by Chepelink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, vvhorus said:

Maybe they need to push back the game release until such a time they are able to figure out a viable solution? Are they biting more than they could chew?

I would honestly prefer to play a game that, at launch, has no issues, or at least the ones that will inevitably pop up are not game-breaking. The ability of not being able to save a game without it being broken when a patch gets released is pretty bad. Do you think I'm being unreasonable and harsh now? Wait until the game releases and hordes of really angry players flood these forums, Steam's, Twitter and Facebook demanding action. What will SES do then? Will they claim that they didn't know about it and scramble to find solutions? Who knows.

Dude, nothing personal against anyone here. I just want a straight answer from someone in the know, not a bunch of irrelevant explanations, speculations or justifications. Is that so hard to get?

for all we know, they HAVE figured out a viable solution, but it's item number 37614 behind a list of far larger issues. this bug seems important to YOU, but that doesn't make it The Most Important Bug of All. your bug is roughly a 0.001% occurrence or so (and 99.999% chance it's tied to data corruption from updates which we already KNOW won't happen after release when updates aren't monthly+massive anymore); there's crash bugs out there that are 100% occurance. i'd personally prefer to delete my save and help them with the latter so that i can play long enough to see the former. not just throw up my hands "well damn, they SAID my saves won't carry over and now my save didn't carry over! screw this!". if everybody quit bug hunting because they ran into a one-in-a-million anomaly, the game woulda died pre-pre-alpha (and no software would ever be developed again, either).

as a paying customer in early access (as with any pre-release game), you should realize you have responsibilities too. notably: *duplicate the bug*. start 10 new worlds, 20 new worlds, duplicate the bug. if it indeed hasn't already been fixed, you will be able to duplicate it. it most likely doesn't exist, since you carried over a save across massive pre-release updates that are KNOWN to corrupt. attempting to carry over saves has bugs of its own, which also won't exist after release when they're NOT putting out massive incompatible updates. which is why they warn you not to carry over saves. you're basing this bug on a single world carried over from a deprecated version. "deprecated version" being the reason no dev, indie game or otherwise, would take the report to heart. they told you it'll corrupt, YOU knew it had a high chance of being corrupted, nobody's surprised when it corrupts.

start new worlds and duplicate it if you truly think it's such a crippling bug that might slip into release. in these circumstances, it's a figurative figment of your imagination

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now