X3: Terran Conflict - Update 2.0 is here! (UPDATED)

[hoax1210au]

Thanks to you guys from Egosoft and X Universe.

[Cantankerous]

From the Steam Thread (I think it probably deserves capitalization now) but buried rather deeply:

I'm sorry it wasn't possible to release the update on Steam at the same time as on the website.

We've been trying to make this happen and prepared everything but a number of circumstances led to some inevitable delays:

Everything was set to go, but we had to stop the Steam release because of the 2.0a hotfix. We're not going to deploy the "glow bug" version via Steam obviously.
So we had to make sure they can integrate the fixed version into the update which requires additional time.
This and staff availability means that the update cannot be deployed before next monday.

We realize you are unhappy about this delay and apologize for the inconvenience but we can assure you that you are not missing out on any of the features of 2.0 because of this.

(Emphasis mine.)

Please keep discussion about it in that thread.

Ok, understood, and while I'm not complaining per se, the only responses we get are keep it to the 24 page (so far) long thread that you have to wade through in total to get the simple answer that no one knows how long it will take.

A simple, "Steam is still not updated and we are not sure when they will be" would save those of us who purchased through Steam an immense amount of time and frustration at wading through the looooooooong and mostly uninformative thread that we keep getting referenced to.

Thank you.


Isshia

[CBJ]

Any news we post quickly gets buried, as happened with the one you just quoted. When there is some progress, though, we'll post it both here and in the other thread. You won't be able to miss it.

Edit: My X3TC installation on Steam just started updating...

[Cantankerous]

Thank you, really, thank you guys for the job you do.

***And now, for breaking news!**

******FLASH*****

It seems the job must have just gotten done! As I type this my version of Steam seems to be updating to the 2.0 Patch!!!


Happy Days!





Isshia

[CBJ]

I can confirm that the 2.0 patch is now live on Steam.

[Tycow]

Ok, 2.0 is out the way.

Any hard info on 2.1 yet? That's the patch I'm interested in (as many are I'm sure) as it's the performance patch!

It's supposed to be "hot on the heels of 2.0" (XS' words), so get with the info!

[tim997]

Ok, 2.0 is out the way.

Any hard info on 2.1 yet? That's the patch I'm interested in (as many are I'm sure) as it's the performance patch!

It's supposed to be "hot on the heels of 2.0" (XS' words), so get with the info!

I would also like to hear some news about 2.1. It's the patch that many of us are really waiting for, as it contains the performance fix.

I was using an altered version of 2.0 + the Beta performance fix just to be able to get a playable framerate, but it's buggy and unreliable. So I've once again stopped playing, waiting for 2.1. I know I've mentioned it before, but this performance issue has been around since the October release, and I know many people are really cheesed off that it's still not fixed - Particularly those of us who know you've had a fix since February! Yes, I realize that the initial fix had a couple of issues, but they were ironed out some time ago. It's mid-April now, 6 months after release, and I still consider X3:TC to be unplayable in its patched, vanilla form.

[eladan]

Yes, I realize that the initial fix had a couple of issues, but they were ironed out some time ago.

How exactly do you know they've been ironed out, let alone 'some time ago'? Got a link?

Anyway, what other information is needed other than it will fix the performance issues, and that it will follow shortly after 2.0? Keeping in mind that very rarely will an actual release date be mentioned for a patch.

[tim997]

Yes, I realize that the initial fix had a couple of issues, but they were ironed out some time ago.

How exactly do you know they've been ironed out, let alone 'some time ago'? Got a link?

Anyway, what other information is needed other than it will fix the performance issues, and that it will follow shortly after 2.0? Keeping in mind that very rarely will an actual release date be mentioned for a patch.

Ok, I guess I was assuming - Speaking as a graphics programmer, I would ASSUME that the glow glitch should have been ironed out some time ago. After all, it's known that it's a problem in post-processing and it is also know that the problem only occurred after the exe was modified with the performance fix. Therefore, I would think that it's fixed by now.

What we're asking for though is a release estimate though. Xenon_Slayer did say "Rest assured, we are still working to make the EXE ready for 2.1 which will be hot on the heels of X3TC 2.0. ". Again, we have been waiting for this fix since October! Is it any wonder we're ticked off?!

Damn, you Eladan - Why must you fight us at every opportunity Shouldn't you be playing X3:TC since we all know that YOU can!!!! GRAAAH!

Well, I'm going to the pub.... which could make my next post in this thread delightful interesting!

[eladan]

What we're asking for though is a release estimate though. Xenon_Slayer did say "Rest assured, we are still working to make the EXE ready for 2.1 which will be hot on the heels of X3TC 2.0. ". Again, we have been waiting for this fix since October! Is it any wonder we're ticked off?!

I know, and I do sympathise. However, saying that 2.1 will be 'hot on the heels' of 2.0 already seems like a pretty good release estimate to me. I doubt you'll get a better one than that.

Damn, you Eladan - Why must you fight us at every opportunity

Just injecting a bit of reality into discussions wherever I can.

[softweir]

I would hope that they want v2.1 to be the LAST patch of TC, and are therefore making absolutely certain that every known bug has been tested and eliminated.

If you look on the Technical Support forum you will see the occasional bug mentioned, and while it is by no means a valid Bug list, it does indicate that the glow bug isn't the only problem the patch needs to address.

If, as I hope, Egosoft want to make this the last patch, then I would expect some delay between the 2.0 release (which had a date set by the American shop release) and the 2.1 patch release.

In addition, there is new content being created which also needs debugging - I sincerely doubt a community mission would come to Egosoft entirely bug free!

So, I hope it will take time. Days or weeks. I hope not months.

[eladan]

I would hope that they want v2.1 to be the LAST patch of TC, and are therefore making absolutely certain that every known bug has been tested and eliminated.

I'd doubt that 2.1 would be the final patch. I think they'd probably want to push the fixes out for serious issues (such as the performance issue) asap, and only once those sorts of issues are out of the way would they look to clean up any remaining, more minor issues where they can take a bit more time to clean up, knowing that no one has a broken game waiting for it.

[Tycow]

What we're asking for though is a release estimate though. Xenon_Slayer did say "Rest assured, we are still working to make the EXE ready for 2.1 which will be hot on the heels of X3TC 2.0. ". Again, we have been waiting for this fix since October! Is it any wonder we're ticked off?!

I know, and I do sympathise. However, saying that 2.1 will be 'hot on the heels' of 2.0 already seems like a pretty good release estimate to me. I doubt you'll get a better one than that.

Mebbe a bit of info as to what the patch fixes or what has been causing the issues?

I'm in the same boat as Tim. I got the game on release day, and haven't enjoyed it/played it properly because of the godawful performance problems I face.

I just want to have a fair crack at it without modding it into oblivion!

[mpcribeiro]

We're pleased to announce that Update 2.0 for X3: Terran Conflict, which features The Aldrin Missions, is now available for download from Egosoft.com.

After a few months of patient waiting since Update 1.4, players of X3: Terran Conflict can now get their hands on the 2.0 patch. This update, which has undergone more widespread testing than is normally the case, features not only an extension to the original Terran Conflict story, but also a new ship variation, new sectors to explore, Terran stations to build and much more adventure!

The Terran Conflict development team and our network of betatesters have been conducting their own version of Operation Final Fury against some of the niggling issues that our community has brought to our attention. Universe Traders, too often propping up bars in local trading stations, got a swift kick up the backside to get them back to work. The OTAS Boreas has undergone some much-needed balancing. A number of other key issues have also been addressed, including improved support for PCs equipped with more than 2GB of RAM.

Terran Conflict players who bought their game from Steam are reminded that their Steam client will automatically update the game and that there is no need to download the patch from Egosoft.com.

Owners of the X3: Terran Conflict PC-DVD (versions 1.0.1 to 1.4) are invited to download the 2.0 patch from here.

While you all download and start to enjoy X3: Terran Conflict 2.0, you can be assured that we at Egosoft will keep on beavering away, possibly at another little update called 2.1!

IMPORTANT NOTE: During the final packing of the 2.0 patch a data error occured, the effect of which did not become apparent until after the patch was released. This error has now been corrected and new versions of the patch will be offered as version 2.0a. For those who have already applied the 2.0 patch a smaller hotfix (version 2.0a) will be available. We apologise for any inconvenience this causes and hope it does not affect your enjoyment of the game.

There is additional news on X3: Terran Conflict 2.0, as well as other news, in Edition 36 of the X-Universe News.

Click here to read Edition 36 of the X-Universe News.

AND FOR WHEN is the patch to FIX the instability, freezes, memory leak and crashes of the 2.0a?

should I keep sending "X3TC has encountered a problem and needs to close" to Microsoft? every time it crashes? (joke)

I'm sorry not a good release... going back to previous version 1.4 which is more stable. Thanks

[pjknibbs]

Instability, freezes, memory leaks and crashes which apparently 99% of the people playing this patch don't get, which suggests it's more likely to be your system than the patch.

[escouflanfer]

Hello,

I'm not very happy with X3:TC, and worst of it when I remember the first version (OK guys, go sold that...). Even with 2.0a patch, there is a lot of work to do to deliver a playable and good game.

I would like to suggest remaining things to consider for a next patch, the most important in first. I'm sure that other players have good ideas too. Welcome.


1) Fix autopilot

Always stupid crashes on objects. Funny to be vaporized on an asteroid after trying escaping another one which wasn't a problem...

2) Have a better sector management

2.1) Add forbidden sector option

No player ships allowed in a forbidden sector, except direct order by player and his confirmation ==> I don't like to lose ships because they were crossing a central Xenon sector or trying to trade with a neutral station in a Yaki sector full of hostile ships...

2.2) Show sector properties

Sector already visited by player? Sector already mapped? ==> I don't like using log entry for these events, where is the find command?

2.3) Fix strange things with sector map

- Zoom sector unable to cover the entire sector ==> possible objects not seen on the map.
- Funny distance shown under zoom in/out depends on the level of zoom ==> would you easily find the sector radius you need if you want to auto map completely the sector ?

2.4) Unknown sectors with distinct names

- No need to write more.

3) Have less micro-management in fleet management

3.1) Enhanced notification of finished work

- Default option yes / no defined in global options and applied to all new ships or reapply as friend/foe global option. Can be overridden at ship level.
- Notification message shows also which was the command finished, with qualified result: success or failure and its cause ==> helpful if you have a large fleet or problem with commands.

3.2) Fix the destroyed properties message level

A property loss cannot be just a logged message. It must also be an input message ==> I dislike look every minute on the statistics to see if everything is OK.

3.3) Fix the sequence of group ending task notification message

The message must be sent after the last ship of the group has finished the task, not because the “leader” have finished ==> I dislike giving conflicting order because the last job is not done.

3.4) Fix the freighter drones

The freighter drones must have the capacity to land on non player station. ==> The big ships must have the capacity to use their freighter drones to trade with any station they cannot land on.

3.5) Fix supply software

- "equip like" command, launched from individual ship ==> I don't like be asked several times "select sector", "select ship" when I don't know the meaning of each request to complete the command. The command description is useless. It ruins the game feeling.
- "equip like" command, launched in group: works better ==> why this difference?
- Other commands: no better.

3.6) Add model definitions and commands to use models to easily equip large fleet

- A model is a named list of wares defined by the player. Each ware in one given model is defined with a number of items to equip and a priority in which the list must be processed.
- Add command for an individual ship or a group to "equip ship/group itself as the model". The commanded ship or group will proceed with the first ware, when finished the second ware, etc.
- Add command for an individual ship to "assist ship/group to equip as the model". The commanded ship will proceed with the first ware, by looking for the maximum item it can carry in limit of equipment needed and then distribute it to the assisted ship(s).
- The commands respect all the rules (no jump if no jump drive equipped or not enough e-cells in cargo bay for example, no buy if not enough notoriety or ware don't fit cargo bay, no equipment transferred without freighter drones or teleporter). Only one exception useful for the second command: 0 normal volume objects can be transported in more than one at volume as 10 space equivalent (example: 10 jump drive transported at 100 units of volume in cargo bay).
- These commands need better and fixed supply software.

3.5) Add a enhanced best buy equipment command

It gives directly access to known wares compatible with the ship, and without need to select sector then station. It asks the number of ware to equip. It keeps the request of the maximum number range sectors from the ship to find the ware selected ==> Seems like a command for better and fixed supply software...

3.6) Fix missile bug in player ships

Edit << No missiles in cargo bay must be launched if none are installed and 0% fire is defined ==> however, this is not respected for player ship or your own ship (I think when scanning ships or heavy combat). >>

4) Have an enhanced military management

4.1) Add interest into advanced satellites

- Add a global command to parameter a level of alert (size / number of ships / race) to be informed of fleet cruising in any sector where one or more advanced satellite is deployed. For example, a logged message informs that a Xenon fleet has been detected in xx sector with nn Qs.
- The watch can be extended to inform about new or destructed race stations. For example, Duke's Buccaneers has been rebuilding in sector xx.

4.2) Add behavior for player class ships with hostile ships

- Behavior: don't go in sector or flee out of sector, if hostile ships are detected by any means (example for TP/TS class) / keep 5 km distance minimum or flee out of sector (example for M5 class) / ignore / defend only (as protect ship for turrets) / attack on sight hostile ships detected by the ship itself / attack in sector hostile ships detected by any means / attack in any sector where hostile ships detected by any means
- Behavior can be given as global level, group level, ship level, with this priority. Global behavior can be reapplied as friend / foe option to all ships, except ships in groups. A change in a group behavior implies automatic changes to all ships inside the group. A ship behavior can be defined as idem global behavior, its group behavior, or specific. A ship behavior can also be used to change global or group behavior with automatic propagation.
- The player is asked to confirm order when trying overriding defined behavior.
- Pacific behavior may use new navigation software, idem aggressive behavior may use new combat software

4.3) Define weapons / missiles combinations against class ships

- Instead having 4 groups of weapon, you have one group for each class ships + one class for missile. Idem, you have one missile group for each class ships + one class for missile.
- One weapon/missile category can be installed in more than one group.
- The ship activate the group which match the class ship it is currently fighting.
- This ability may need a new software combat.

I will send later other suggestions.

Escouflanfer

[amtct]

Hello,

I'm not very happy with X3:TC, and worst of it when I remember the first version (OK guys, go sold that...). Even with 2.0a patch, there is a lot of work to do to deliver a playable and good game.

I would like to suggest remaining things to consider for a next patch, the most important in first. I'm sure that other players have good ideas too. Welcome.


1) Fix autopilot

Always stupid crashes on objects. Funny to be vaporized on an asteroid after trying escaping another one which wasn't a problem...

2) Have a better sector management

2.1) Add forbidden sector option

No player ships allowed in a forbidden sector, except direct order by player and his confirmation ==> I don't like to lose ships because they were crossing a central Xenon sector or trying to trade with a neutral station in a Yaki sector full of hostile ships...

2.2) Show sector properties

Sector already visited by player? Sector already mapped? ==> I don't like using log entry for these events, where is the find command?

2.3) Fix strange things with sector map

- Zoom sector unable to cover the entire sector ==> possible objects not seen on the map.
- Funny distance shown under zoom in/out depends on the level of zoom ==> would you easily find the sector radius you need if you want to auto map completely the sector ?

2.4) Unknown sectors with distinct names

- No need to write more.

3) Have less micro-management in fleet management

3.1) Enhanced notification of finished work

- Default option yes / no defined in global options and applied to all new ships or reapply as friend/foe global option. Can be overridden at ship level.
- Notification message shows also which was the command finished, with qualified result: success or failure and its cause ==> helpful if you have a large fleet or problem with commands.

3.2) Fix the destroyed properties message level

A property loss cannot be just a logged message. It must also be an input message ==> I dislike look every minute on the statistics to see if everything is OK.

3.3) Fix the sequence of group ending task notification message

The message must be sent after the last ship of the group has finished the task, not because the “leader” have finished ==> I dislike giving conflicting order because the last job is not done.

3.4) Fix the freighter drones

The freighter drones must have the capacity to land on non player station. ==> The big ships must have the capacity to use their freighter drones to trade with any station they cannot land on.

3.5) Fix supply software

- "equip like" command, launched from individual ship ==> I don't like be asked several times "select sector", "select ship" when I don't know the meaning of each request to complete the command. The command description is useless. It ruins the game feeling.
- "equip like" command, launched in group: works better ==> why this difference?
- Other commands: no better.

3.6) Add model definitions and commands to use models to easily equip large fleet

- A model is a named list of wares defined by the player. Each ware in one given model is defined with a number of items to equip and a priority in which the list must be processed.
- Add command for an individual ship or a group to "equip ship/group itself as the model". The commanded ship or group will proceed with the first ware, when finished the second ware, etc.
- Add command for an individual ship to "assist ship/group to equip as the model". The commanded ship will proceed with the first ware, by looking for the maximum item it can carry in limit of equipment needed and then distribute it to the assisted ship(s).
- The commands respect all the rules (no jump if no jump drive equipped or not enough e-cells in cargo bay for example, no buy if not enough notoriety or ware don't fit cargo bay, no equipment transferred without freighter drones or teleporter). Only one exception useful for the second command: 0 normal volume objects can be transported in more than one at volume as 10 space equivalent (example: 10 jump drive transported at 100 units of volume in cargo bay).
- These commands need better and fixed supply software.

3.5) Add a enhanced best buy equipment command

It gives directly access to known wares compatible with the ship, and without need to select sector then station. It asks the number of ware to equip. It keeps the request of the maximum number range sectors from the ship to find the ware selected ==> Seems like a command for better and fixed supply software...

3.6) Fix missile bug in player ships

No missiles in cargo bay can be launched if none are installed and 0% fire is defined ==> this occurs with player ships or your own ship (methinks when scanning ships)

4) Have an enhanced military management

4.1) Add interest into advanced satellites

- Add a global command to parameter a level of alert (size / number of ships / race) to be informed of fleet cruising in any sector where one or more advanced satellite is deployed. For example, a logged message informs that a Xenon fleet has been detected in xx sector with nn Qs.
- The watch can be extended to inform about new or destructed race stations. For example, Duke's Buccaneers has been rebuilding in sector xx.

4.2) Add behavior for player class ships with hostile ships

- Behavior: don't go in sector or flee out of sector, if hostile ships are detected by any means (example for TP/TS class) / keep 5 km distance minimum or flee out of sector (example for M5 class) / ignore / defend only (as protect ship for turrets) / attack on sight hostile ships detected by the ship itself / attack in sector hostile ships detected by any means / attack in any sector where hostile ships detected by any means
- Behavior can be given as global level, group level, ship level, with this priority. Global behavior can be reapplied as friend / foe option to all ships, except ships in groups. A change in a group behavior implies automatic changes to all ships inside the group. A ship behavior can be defined as idem global behavior, its group behavior, or specific. A ship behavior can also be used to change global or group behavior with automatic propagation.
- The player is asked to confirm order when trying overriding defined behavior.
- Pacific behavior may use new navigation software, idem aggressive behavior may use new combat software

4.3) Define weapons / missiles combinations against class ships

- Instead having 4 groups of weapon, you have one group for each class ships + one class for missile. Idem, you have one missile group for each class ships + one class for missile.
- One weapon/missile category can be installed in more than one group.
- The ship activate the group which match the class ship it is currently fighting.
- This ability may need a new software combat.

I will send later other suggestions.

Escouflanfer

OMG,you need a new game

You can't say that this game is unplayable.Look at those people which are playing and telling about their game here on this forum.

[tim997]

Instability, freezes, memory leaks and crashes which apparently 99% of the people playing this patch don't get, which suggests it's more likely to be your system than the patch.

Do you have hard statistics to back up that figure? Personally, I haven't had too many problems with stability or lockups under 1.4. I can't comment much about 2.0 because I've stopped playing until the 2.1 performance fix is out.

My point is though, I've been in mpcribeiro's position and it's very frustrating to simply be told that no one else suffers from problem X and it's just your system. It could very well be his setup, but convincing Egosoft that a real problem exists somewhere is excruciatingly difficult!

Take the performance issues for instance - A handful of us pointed this out from almost day 1, and we were continually told that most people had no performance issues and that it was most likely a codec/hardware/driver issue on our part. It couldn't possibly be a problem with the game engine! Now there's a thread with 400+ posts of people complaining about performance issues, and it turns out it was the game engine at fault. A fix is now on the way. However, it shouldn't have been that hard... oh and we still don't actually have the fix, btw.

Anyway, my point boils down to two things:

* Don't quote statistics showing that no one else suffers from problem X, unless they're hard statistics taken from a proper market sample. If it's just what you feel from reading posts and the experiences of a tiny handful of people then it's not a proper statistic. If you do have the statistics then great, but at least elaborate for us!

* Don't assume that every single problem under the sun is caused by codecs, hardware configs & drivers. At this point, it's impossible to argue that the X3:TC engine is flawless! Yes, codecs, etc. can cause problems but clearly not 100% of them.

That's all - feel free to flame me

Cheers!

[pjknibbs]

Firstly, I didn't say that NOBODY else had his problem, just that most people didn't. Secondly, patch 2.0 went through an extremely extensive beta testing phase, including (for the first time) a public beta where *anybody* could get involved. Why did none of those people find this mysterious crash/instability issue that apparently only exists in 2.0?

[amtct]

Firstly, I didn't say that NOBODY else had his problem, just that most people didn't. Secondly, patch 2.0 went through an extremely extensive beta testing phase, including (for the first time) a public beta where *anybody* could get involved. Why did none of those people find this mysterious crash/instability issue that apparently only exists in 2.0?

I CAN't have a CTD or instability.I tested on different OS (Xp,Vista,even Windows 7) with ffdshow or without .Actully for me its very hard to terminate the X3TC.ex process from the taskmanager.