16 replies to this topic

[Freedom]

For those of you that think I just have a bad attitude and am starting trouble about going on and on about a stable release of the Zelda Classic engine.

Let me explain why I'm where I'm at here, and let you walk a mile in my shoes.

First of all I love Zelda Classic, I think it's a great program, and it gives a lot of people, that otherwise don't have much else going on, a release in their lives, like the many older players who used to come to Zelda Classic to play games but lately have been becoming fewer and fewer because of the lack of quests and the database problems at AGN.

With me personally, I started The Adventures of Robinhood right after the release of Link to Tortuga, in February 2005.
I built it all the way up through level 4, and then because I could find no way around the shop bug in the 2.10 I released it as a demo and gave up on it all together.
I then spent the next several months beta testing towards a stable release, and building a complete new Adventure of Robinhood tileset, which was released later that year.
I continued beta testing for a stable release and started building Robinhood again in late 2005 and throughout 2006, with the promise that there was going to be a stable release that year.
I progressed up to 2.11b12c with Robinhood while also beta testing, when the 12c totally trashed my Robinhood quest.
I repaired it, and progressed on to the 2.11b16, where it totally trashed my Robinhood quest again.
That's the second time I gave up on Robinhood, and about 2 years of work went down the drain.
It sets in the 16b folder now with the FFC's and the subscreen tore up.

There are two things that I've noticed about the people who have been criticizing me for being so insistent about a stable release.
They are always people that have beta tested very little towards a stable release, and they always seem to be people that haven't built and released any quests of there own, or maybe one quest tops.
Personally I think if you had done what I've done and been where I've been you would feel the same way.
I just want to build quests to release for people so they can have a little joy in their life and have something to do other than sit and watch Ophera Winfrey on their boob tube.
If that pisses you off, then I'm sorry.
At this point it's going to take a stable release for me to continue on, I don't think that's asking for too much considering how long it's been, but maybe it is.

[Mitchfork]

Freedom... I just want you to know that even though a lot of people disagree with you, not a lot of people hate you. You're genuinely trying to do something good for the ZC community, and I respect that. I'm sure that others are thinking the same thing... and besides, you've gone through hell and back trying to get a quest out, and that just shouldn't happen.

The revolution is here, whether you like it or not, ZC-ers.

[Animus01]

I noticed you mentioned a shop bug. I know it's very late by now, but can you work around it by using a different shop number? And if that doesn't work, maybe put your shop on another screen? Or possibly, change the rupee values and/or the positions of the items? A bug shouldn't be so potent as to occur even if everything that I mentioned had changed.

[Freedom]

I noticed you mentioned a shop bug. I know it's very late by now, but can you work around it by using a different shop number? And if that doesn't work, maybe put your shop on another screen? Or possibly, change the rupee values and/or the positions of the items? A bug shouldn't be so potent as to occur even if everything that I mentioned had changed.

I tried for several weeks to find a work around to that shop bug.
You could never know when it was going to happen or why, one time the shop would show up, the next time it wouldn't, or it would for me and then not my testers or a player.
I never could find a what was causing it or a sure fire way around it, so that meant removing the items that were only available in shops and giving them elsewhere (in Tortuga) and turning off the overworld map all together since it was triggering secret combos on layers used on the overworld screens.
90% of Link to Tortuga was built in 183, and then it was upgraded to 2.10 and level 9 finished and released.
I didn't know about those bugs when I released it.
I edited Link to Tortuga, and let it stay released even though it changed the gameplay dramatically, but I wasn't going to do Robinhood without being able to use shops, and I tried and they just wouldn't work right period.

[Red Phazon]

I've been around the Zelda Classic community for almost three years now and have always respected you and your quests and still do. Although I've never finished a quest, I completely understand what you mean and your "arguments." I can only imagine all the work you've put into ZC and how frustrated I'd be if I were you. Um, well, that's all I can say right now.

[Koopa]

If there's anything that can sum up what freedom's contribution to ZC is, it's some of jman's last words
"he's the best beta tester we ever had".

Or, to put it differently, he's probably done as much as anyone can do without actually being a developer.

Last time this topic came up some months ago there was a bit of a flame war going on about ZC's future in which neither side showed much tact. But that's past, and Freedom's current efforts - poll and all - show a valuable community member from his best side.

I can only invite everyone to debate ZC's future in a mature way - Freedom has just shown that he can do it.

[ShadowTiger]

Aww, Koopa, Freedom, ... Koopa's words cemented together the best thread I've ever read. ^__^ .. this week, at least. If people want to make a point, I feel that the best way to do it is via love, not war, with the appropriate terms replacing the ones used.

I'm so glad this situation is well on its way towards completion. We've all seen the ZC Wiki, right? (God I hope so. >.< )

[CastChaos]

Everybody with common sense knew that Freedom wants good (bugfixes, working database, etc...). I would never side with those whos think that "claiming something to be bad" or "wanting to better something" is just bad personality. These people just confuse ZCdevs. Freedom's name will be written with gold in ZC history.

[Freedom]

Everybody with common sense knew that Freedom wants good (bugfixes, working database, etc...). I would never side with those whos think that "claiming something to be bad" or "wanting to better something" is just bad personality. These people just confuse ZCdevs. Freedom's name will be written with gold in ZC history.

wow... that's a heck of a nice thing to say, thank you, BUT could you just send cash instead?

[Espilan]

I apologize ahead of time in case I end up throwing this topic off-track (which I don't doubt will eventually happen anyway), but my post is generally in response to one thing Freedom said in the topic's starting post:

There are two things that I've noticed about the people who have been criticizing me for being so insistent about a stable release.
They are always people that have beta tested very little towards a stable release, and they always seem to be people that haven't built and released any quests of there own, or maybe one quest tops.

The impression I get from reading the above is that you may not value the opinion of these people, on the basis of their not having the same experience that you do. I can understand that as far as the ones who actually end up causing trouble over it goes, but we're looking at what seems to be a generalization here, meaning your statement would go on to mean that you think everyone that would criticize you has this lack of experience, or that everyone with a lack of experience would blindly criticize the people that want a stable release.

I'm pretty sure you're going to tell me that this impression is incorrect. If it is in fact incorrect, I request that you clarify the above quoted statement: be more specific on the kind(s) of people you're talking about, but try not to name anyone; I have my doubts that fingerpointing is a good idea right now.

Now, I'll respond to specific parts of what you had said:

insistent about a stable release

Personally, I don't think it to be a good idea to try to pressure the devs to pull this off. If they begin rushing things because of people calling for a stable release to be done soon, don't you think they could be prone to making more errors that way? The best option is simply to be sure they know what the community wants, but not to try to hurry them through it.

Also, stable releases for something that is being changed so often is generally not going to happen very often, in my opinion. With everything that is changed or fixed, something else will almost always come up; even if a 'stable' release does get done, someone will eventually find something that needs to be addressed.

No program (or programmer) is perfect, after all.

beta tested very little

Isn't this why most of the more-recent builds have gone public? Instead of having a small handful of testers, the devs are letting the whole community give them the feedback they're looking for. They may not necessarily flat-out say who's identified what bug(s) either, so how can you tell if someone has or hasn't actually attempted to test things out for themselves? For all anyone knows, some of these people could just be PMing the devs and not making public posts about it.

haven't built and released any quests

The way this was worded is basically saying that even if they do mess around in ZQuest, that if they don't actually release anything, that they still fall into the group you have described. What about the people that mess with ZQuest just as a timewaster or to see what they could do with it?

[Freedom]

In response to it all....
Why should the wishes of people that just play with the program, and never attempt to actually build and release quests, overrule the peoples wishes that build and release quests which in turn then helps the community grow by bringing players in?
The last "stable" release was in 2004, and it was buggy, isn't it time now for a new one?

Look at this logically for a moment.
An unstable version stops quests from being completed and released, but gives those who just play with the program for fun something to play with.

A STABLE version allows builders to complete and release quests + still gives the others their play toy.

Which is more logical?

Edited by Freedom, 28 June 2007 - 02:43 PM.

[Espilan]

Why should the wishes of people that just play with the program, and never attempt to actually build and release quests, overrule the peoples wishes that build and release quests which in turn then helps the community grow by bringing players in?

It shouldn't, but it may not work in reverse, either: You can't deny that there will be people that'll want to keep seeing newer things to see what'll be possible later on, and as was proven in the poll you had posted, if there's enough demand for something, chances are it will at least be put into consideration.

Also, even though some people never release anything, that doesn't stop them from reporting any bugs they might find. Some of these people may also want to see a stable version, while others may want to see new features so they can pick those apart too to get them done and out of the way. If enough of those people keep telling the devs what they find so any newer things can be fixed as well for the release of the next stable version to follow (whenever that may be), then the community still benefits in the end, doesn't it?

An unstable version stops quests from being completed and released,

True.

but gives those who just play with the program for fun something to play with.

True, but if they notify the developers of the things they find, then this could possibly be resolved after some time.

A STABLE version allows builders to complete and release quests + still gives the others their play toy.

True, but soon enough, people will begin calling for more new features, and things are eventually back to the above.

[elise]

A stable version now doesn't mean developers should stop making other newer versions with all neat and new features in it .the community just need a stable version now too.......it's good for the community. Freedom never says anywhere that the developers should stop after a stable version .The Poll was started by Dark Nation not by Freedom .....Dark Nation put the poll above it after the posting was already made .
But this all is really not the topic here this is just the story and the feeling from someone that makes quests and how frustrating it can be if you are in his shoes .Shoes make me think about shoelace also a questdesigner that stopped because there isn't a stable version .......I think it would be a great loss for the community if he never release another quest because there isn't a stable release

and Yeah shoot me I think the voices about a stable version from questmakers is more important for the community then for screen makers or home playing around in ZQ without releasing anything people.

Edited by elise, 28 June 2007 - 04:24 PM.

[The_Amaster]

True, but soon enough, people will begin calling for more new features, and things are eventually back to the above.

Hopefully that wouldn't happen with my one feature build idea, which, now that we're nearing a stable 2.5, I am going to keep hyping, because I feel it would appease both sides.

Personally, the reason I haven't released a quest is because I'm pouring all of my good ideas and work into my big, epic, magnum opus.

Outside the argument, Freedom, like everyone else has said, you are amazing and you have my respect.

Edited by The_Amaster, 28 June 2007 - 04:27 PM.

[Freedom]

espilan,

Just looking to argue huh?
Your points don't make much sense, since a new release now isn't going to stop the additions in the future, it's just going to give builders a long awaited tool to use to start building quests with again.
Once that's done then those others will still have their betas to play with and if they choose report bugs for, and ask for new features to play with in.

The people I was referring to here;

They are always people that have beta tested very little towards a stable release

know who they are and haven't been contributing in the bug forums or by proxy, so please don't waste my time with that theory, even YOU know better than that.
If you don't want a stable version, then go vote against it, it's your right.