Never seen the V shape jamming bug myself but considering how buggy the old multicellular was itโs not unexpected to hear about such an oddity.
Sorry, I thought it was only for the new position set during the microbe editor, didnโt think it would also be regenerated in-game during cell spliting
Also it seem that due to code being handed out from developer to developer, a lot of things are limited due to no one wanted to break the previous code. Was many of your answer to many questions of the community, due to the time it take to rework it?
As Iโve gotten more experienced in programming, Iโve realized that redoing something basically just shuffles the old bugs out and brings in a (larger) batch of new ones. Itโs extremely hard to redo something or even tweak part of a complex system without breaking something. So if something is just slightly non-optimal I think nowadays that it is just better to leave it. Especially as the microbe stage is now considered done.
Well there is some of that, but most of things in the game could be improved with enough effort. Itโs just that thereโs so many community members just โyellingโ suggestions to just a couple of Thrive developers (Iโm almost the only one who uses the community forums, and from the programmers on the team Iโm basically the only one replying at all here). So the situation with most players having unique ideas (https://suggestions.revolutionarygamesstudio.com/) I would be basically nothing else than a personal code butler for each community member if I implemented all ideas.
So the math just doesnโt work when we usually have just a couple of programming volunteers (and me) active at any given time and up to dozens of community members talking about ideas. Itโs just way, way faster to come up with ideas for things to fix than to actually do them.
If we had a ton of programmers to do stuff on the game, we might some day get through all of our work items, which there are already over 600 without even any of this positioning improving being on the list:
Wouldnโt some of those 600 items be considered no longer needed?
As a person who does not use the Steam Version, I am fine with the Thrive launcher as it is.
Plus it allows easy access to logs
I did close dozens in leading up to 1.0, but I still left items open that arenโt done and would still be kind of nice to do. So the number was about 50 more a few months ago.
Perhaps at some point we should check which ones only apply to stages that are already deemed โcompleteโ?
That makes zero sense. People are not just suddenly going to stop reporting bugs or sharing improvement ideas for the microbe stage, even if that part of the game is done.
So if all โoldโ issues for previous stages are auto closed, all I could do to reply to bug reports โcool that you reported this, however we no longer accept bug reports for the first part of the game, so please get further into the game before encountering a bugโ
That just sounds like a totally insane response to a bug report or a suggestion to a player of a game.
Donโt (some?) patreons already get their name in the credits?
I am not sure if this is related or not, but I am pretty sure entering the editor with undigested food use to cause the food to get stuck and never finish digesting. Somebody fixed that though, didnโt they? Is it possible the fix had an unforeseen consequence? Or maybe Xavia1991 is just mistaken.
Seems like we will have a wave of Thrive videos soonโฆ
Hopefully, YouTubers who regularly play Thrive also gain a boost in viewership from this.
Weโll see about that. These are supposed to only be โsmallโ youtubers for now
Was that the case? I canโt recall that. There was a digestion stuck in general bug that was fixed but Iโm pretty sure it was unrelated to entering the editor.
Of course nothing is truly impossible in software, but based on the error it is a problem in engine memory corruption which I believe is all caused by scene switching. So scene switching itself is the probable trigger here not scene switching when digesting something. At least thatโs my take on the situation.
And I suppose no one else will dive into the technical details here so my analysis will standโฆ
Wouldnโt a relatively easy way of incorporating donors into the game be adding their (modified) names to the species/genus name list?
That would require manual intervention in the form of someone coming up with a suitable root part from each name and of course verifying that the generator canโt result in bad names with the changes. So automating it would be hard.
Would doing it manually by adding a donorโs name to the possible organism name list(s) (if this is how those names are chosen) be easier? Or would it be too much effort aswell?
Thatโs exactly what I saidโฆ the names are made up of a few parts and it would need to be a manual process of breaking up the patronโs name to be suitable for putting in while being careful about potential bad word combinations that might arise.
The game generator lready do that? (1000th post hurray)