so iv heard patch 2.5 is out for devnet5 or somthing!!!! (Now With Changelog!)

[DaddyMonster]

Surely it has to go into public beta today to be ready for gamescom...

Hi all,

Just to put the patch-gamecom question to bed: The patch is not aimed to be released for gamescom.

Appreciate the clarification. Ready when it's ready then.

[spankahontis]

Surely it has to go into public beta today to be ready for gamescom...

Hi all,

Just to put the patch-gamecom question to bed: The patch is not aimed to be released for gamescom.

Ah, so it's going to be released after Gamescon? Thanks XS!

[Cabrelbeuk]

I have no problem with the release date, i just hope that the patch will be ready for public beta before the Gamescom

[mohammadm55]

Surely it has to go into public beta today to be ready for gamescom...

Hi all,

Just to put the patch-gamecom question to bed: The patch is not aimed to be released for gamescom.

well private beta 2 went into effect yesterday

Changed Depots
2871/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2872/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2873/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2874/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2875/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2876/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2877/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2878/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2879/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2880/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2881/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2882/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2883/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
2884/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
258990/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
258991/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
258992/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
258993/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
258994/encryptedmanifests/private_beta2/encrypted_gid: * hidden *
branches/private_beta2/buildid: 349247
branches/private_beta2/description:
branches/private_beta2/pwdrequired: 1
a day ago
Changed changenumber – 630168 › 632412

http://steamdb.info/app/2870/history/

[Alan Phipps]

Well, now we all know that the private beta-testers are, well ... still beta-testing the patch betas, and that the devs are, well .. still developing and fixing the patch betas. I am not entirely sure what this 'sleuthing' is proving. I am certain however that the next patch will be released to public beta after however many private beta versions it takes and only when the devs are ready to do so.

[werewolves?]

The sleuthing is due to the information blackout by Egosoft. What else can people do in the absence of any engagement?

[Santi]

Well, now we all know that the private beta-testers are, well ... still beta-testing the patch betas, and that the devs are, well .. still developing and fixing the patch betas. I am not entirely sure what this 'sleuthing' is proving. I am certain however that the next patch will be released to public beta after however many private beta versions it takes and only when the devs are ready to do so.

Fear not, this is the beta thread for the thread that will announce the beta testing of the Public Beta, you can consider all that has gone so far as beta posts of the true public beta posts that will arise when public beta stops being private beta. Hope this makes the issue clear.

[mohammadm55]

Well, now we all know that the private beta-testers are, well ... still beta-testing the patch betas, and that the devs are, well .. still developing and fixing the patch betas. I am not entirely sure what this 'sleuthing' is proving. I am certain however that the next patch will be released to public beta after however many private beta versions it takes and only when the devs are ready to do so.

Fear not, this is the beta thread for the thread that will announce the beta testing of the Public Beta, you can consider all that has gone so far as beta posts of the true public beta posts that will arise when public beta stops being private beta. Hope this makes the issue clear.

lol there just so mad that we know what there doing behind the scene. at this point if they only release 2.5 no one will really care. they have to either release 3.0 or go home.

[Miniding]

Well, now we all know that the private beta-testers are, well ... still beta-testing the patch betas, and that the devs are, well .. still developing and fixing the patch betas. I am not entirely sure what this 'sleuthing' is proving. I am certain however that the next patch will be released to public beta after however many private beta versions it takes and only when the devs are ready to do so.

Fear not, this is the beta thread for the thread that will announce the beta testing of the Public Beta, you can consider all that has gone so far as beta posts of the true public beta posts that will arise when public beta stops being private beta. Hope this makes the issue clear.

lol there just so mad that we know what there doing behind the scene. at this point if they only release 2.5 no one will really care. they have to either release 3.0 or go home.

We want any update to come weither it's 2.5 or 3.0... it's the release public we need

[YorrickVander]

I fail to understand what importance you place on the version number. The patch is (or at least should by any rational person) judged on its content and quality. To make a judgment based on the jump in major.minor revision reference would be completely irrational.

[Miniding]

Agreed!

[mohammadm55]

I fail to understand what importance you place on the version number. The patch is (or at least should by any rational person) judged on its content and quality. To make a judgment based on the jump in major.minor revision reference would be completely irrational.

yes you are right, by releasing 2.5 would be a minor update while releasing 3.0 would be a major update

[Tamina]

I fail to understand what importance you place on the version number. The patch is (or at least should by any rational person) judged on its content and quality. To make a judgment based on the jump in major.minor revision reference would be completely irrational.

yes you are right, by releasing 2.5 would be a minor update while releasing 3.0 would be a major update

I guess we all agree that on the one point changing the first version-number would be a major update and otherwise not, however there are no rules saying it has to be like this still the past shows us it is likely to be so.

To sum it all up: Still, nobody knows anything and we are still just waiting.


My curiosity is killing me and I don't want to play X Rebirth now before the new patch is out.

[yoyolll]

The 2.0 major update was IMO significantly less helpful than the first 10-20 patches. Those patches made more progress in fixing the game than all the other patches put together, and 2.0 was just advertising. So no, version number doesn't matter in the least. Content does.

[YorrickVander]

yes you are right, by releasing 2.5 would be a minor update while releasing 3.0 would be a major update

They could call it version 10 if they wanted. The number is only a reference system. I personally would argue that the jump to 2.00 was not a major update, but the change in combat was perhaps enough to justify it. The point remains that the version number is immaterial - what's in it, and the quality of the work do matter. Microsoft have shown us regularly that a major version hike (say 7 to 8 ) doesn't mean a damn thing to the usability or quality of the release outside of the dev house. That said I'm hoping ES have something sweet up their sleeves here to justify stopping the promised monthly release cycle.

[spankahontis]

yes you are right, by releasing 2.5 would be a minor update while releasing 3.0 would be a major update

They could call it version 10 if they wanted. The number is only a reference system. I personally would argue that the jump to 2.00 was not a major update, but the change in combat was perhaps enough to justify it. The point remains that the version number is immaterial - what's in it, and the quality of the work do matter. Microsoft have shown us regularly that a major version hike (say 7 to 8 ) doesn't mean a damn thing to the usability or quality of the release outside of the dev house. That said I'm hoping ES have something sweet up their sleeves here to justify stopping the promised monthly release cycle.

It was more than just fixing the fight mechanics (Which isn't 100% fixed).
Just have to watch the 2.0 video, as features go, they added a ton of new stuff.
So I guess when they throw out a 3.0 it'll be a huge rubberstamp to compare previous versions.
the .5, .20 etc. versions just come off as pissy poor smaller fixes.

If anything the 2.+ patches were just to fix and fine tune 2.0's release.
3.0 will likely lead to the same when we have 3.1, 3.20 etc. Just small patches fine tuning 3.0 until there is a 4.0 and so on and so on.

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

I personally would argue that the jump to 2.00 was not a major update

I think I agree with this, even though the numbers of patches don't bother me.
IMO the big numbers, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 etc. should always contain some rather big content.

Maybe 2.0 did contain some major content?
I mean, those new commands for capships are NEAT, small performance boost is always welcomed.
Sucullus being a destroying warmashine since 2.0, that's also NEAT.
Personally I don't like the look of new cockpits, so that's why I think I agree.

And yes, those difficulties. Good stuff. Never switched back from HARD since they released it.
I would beg for even more difficulty, but then combat in Albion would be impossible because of low FPS of 30.

[mohammadm55]

The 2.0 major update was IMO significantly less helpful than the first 10-20 patches. Those patches made more progress in fixing the game than all the other patches put together, and 2.0 was just advertising. So no, version number doesn't matter in the least. Content does.

patches that start with . (1.1 1.2 1.3)are there to fix bugs in most company and to add very little. patches that end with . ( 1.0 2.0 3.0) are there to overhaul the game and add lots of stuff. in 2.0 we got new highways, new mission, new ships. more rockets and bunch of other stuff like not having to board stations witch i believe took alot of code writing for them.

also the reason YOU feel like 1.1 1.2 1.3 did so much for the game is because when the game released it was so buggy it was almost unplayable, so thos patches fixed lots of the bugs.

[jardail]

Hope they have fixed the "wont' mine with the boss looking over my shoulder" bug.

and the "I can't freakin drive under auto pilot control" bug.. you know. the one that makes you run into the ass end of everything in the highways and byways.

[yoyolll]

also the reason YOU feel like 1.1 1.2 1.3 did so much for the game is because when the game released it was so buggy it was almost unplayable, so thos patches fixed lots of the bugs.

Yeah and there's still a million things that need fixing. They should fix gameplay elements and "features" before adding new things.