Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Time gaps between stable patches

JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,829
As discussed during the recent livestream, let us know about your desired time gaps between stable patches for Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition.


  • DerpCityDerpCity Member, Moderator Posts: 303
    Personally, I'd like new stable builds to be smaller but more frequent. IIRC, servers aren't likely to run the development versions because NWNX doesn't get released for them, leading to cases like the 1.75 patch where a ton of features were added, but it led to noticeable regressions and bugs for multiplayer, such as DM's not being able to click on placed area transitions, due to not being tested in multiplayer. Smaller and more frequent stable builds would help find bugs before they accumulate like they did, and also let servers play with the new tools they're being given sooner.

  • GM_ODAGM_ODA Member Posts: 177
    I'm the admin and lead builder of a PW (Argentum Regio) - a huge module (1337+ areas, 4k scripts) - and ONE co-developer to help me. If you put out these updates too frequently we will never be able to keep up with the pace of change and by lagging in version we will be crippled as far as attracting new players is concerned.

    We need a little time to sort things out between versions.

    That said, owing to 'clean code and good planning' in large measure, the last update only broke about a dozen scripts total - so the sorting out went fairly quick.

    We could maybe handle one stable build per month, maybe.

  • dTddTd Member Posts: 182
    As a huge module maintainer and builder myself I'd like to see smaller more frequent stable builds. I want to use the new features, plan on them, work them into the module but I use nwnx and since it only releases for stable I have to wait to get these features out. I agree with DerpCity and his feelings about the last stable release exactly.

  • DM_DjinnDM_Djinn Member Posts: 109
    If new builds are smaller and more frequent and include extensive documentation and an ERF and test module (as is the successful format of NWNvault) then it will ameliorate some of the challenges faced by smaller module development teams.

    A very small and yet well-documented update once every two weeks would be ideal for our 3-5 person development team. In the case of the creature transform feature, it would look like one creature, one item, and one placeable in the ERF and the test module could be a single area that includes all three things.

    GIve us an example of the feature with a sample Spell script, like Reduce Person. Then, help us identify the accompanying 2DAs to change to update class spell lists and ensure the new spell is able to be scribed, able to be learned from a scroll by wizards, and so on.

  • pscythepscythe Member Posts: 116
    GM_ODA said:

    We could maybe handle one stable build per month, maybe.

    Exactly my thinking.

  • ShadowMShadowM Member Posts: 571
    I agree one 1 stable build a month, but I like to say

    I highly suggest PW out there make a beta/development module (simple small world with just a few quests and there haks/ based off their world maybe some new stuff that was added to the development build that they can be test in game) for their players to test on with development builds, this will give us more eyes on catching errors. This is easy with steam as the player just switch to development build and back again. You could offer xp / other incentives to these players for helping you test things. Thank you to the pw world who do.

  • shadguyshadguy Member Posts: 154
    What would people feel about planned clusters of stable builds? eg, What if the previous stable build had been followed up with "stable" builds of the regression fixes? It means more frequent PW updates when they come, with reprieves in between.

    That might be a strategy to enable more timely PW playerbase+builderbase feedback cycles. I think those are the folks more likely to notice and report stuff, but it may be hard for some servers to test much in between stable builds in a meaningful way. Clustering the builds could potentially deliver smooth sailing between some rough patches, but it might mean those rough patches are truly rough on some builders, too.

    The nwnx team only supports stable builds, and many PWs are tied to that, so that drives some of my thinking. I dunno how the nwnx folks would feel about clustered releases though.

    So, I dunno what's best. Just an idea. Thougts/Reactions?


  • dTddTd Member Posts: 182
    I'm all for the stable clustered builds, frankly all this time my PW has had these "regressions" now it's been too long. nwnx is the key though, I can't update with with dev builds if there's no nwnx for them so I'd rather have more frequent stable builds. Waiting a month seems too long if there's as many regressions or bugs like this last stable release. That being said, I'm happy and grateful for what we have and kudos to the team and the nwnx folks as well. I appreciate all you do.

  • voidofopinionvoidofopinion Member, Moderator Posts: 1,248
    edited June 2018
    After waiting 10 years for a patch I am O.K with longer times between patches if that means greater stability.

    If something is seriously broken and prevents play then a bug fix ASAP would be appreciated but I am in no hurry for big feature updates. Working is always better than soon.

  • FreshLemonBunFreshLemonBun Member Posts: 905
    I think longer time between stable patches with the exception of hotfixes will also be better for some of those servers that haven't transferred to NWN EE yet. Otherwise I don't see how speeding up releases will improve stability or the amount of features. It seems to me like speeding it up would create more work when ppl could just use a separate installation for the development version.

Sign In or Register to comment.