Jump to content
  • Advertisement
Sign in to follow this  
Anddos

Auto Downloading Patchs But Having a Choice

This topic is 2486 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I like the idea of auto downloading patchs but how about a choice to play the newer version or stick with the old, that way you can patch it after you know other's have tested it for bugs etc, also you would be able to play all the older versions to , so there would be like an archieve of game versions to play, what do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
This might be good if you've managed to make a change that the majority of your player-base doesn't like -- but in general, I think it would more likely just lead to a fractured player-base all playing different versions of the game and therefore having less potential people to play against in a match-making environment.


Consider for example that you have a total player-base of 100 players.
If you apply patches for all users, then any individual player who connects to your match-making server looking for a game to play has 99 potential opponents.
Now, if you have instead allowed players to choose which version to play with, and have released 10 patches that are equally popular, there are suddenly only 9 potential opponents for your player.

Obviously this is a pretty contrived example, but I think it is a genuine potential problem with the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, if it's just a graphics patch maybe. If it's a DLC that offers new areas, that can be dealt with (although it partially segregates users as mentioned above). But if gameplay/physics/network/ai are involved, it's generally not plausible for a player with version x.0 to play with a player who has version x.1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think in a single player game, establishing an archive for at least the previous version patch would be sensible. As an example Skyrim under Steam ran into a number of issues with at least two different patch implementations requiring a large amount of players to rollback their game to previous versions in order to be able to continue game play while waiting for the patches to be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in a single player game, establishing an archive for at least the previous version patch would be sensible.

That's an excellent point -- the problems I mentioned above do not apply to a single-player experience, and the option to easily roll back game updates might be welcome in some situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well the game would be able to match make people against diferent versions and not just the latest, what if you want to see how far a game has come?, you would first load the very first version play it and then patch , so you can see the diferences of development as the game progressed if you was a late comer to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This almost sounds like phasing patches (or expanded DLC's) i.e. You play the game in it's original format complete whatever goals etc the game is set to then download the next patch which then alters the world at which point you play the new version to the goals set and so on. If you are talking literal content change like that then how do you co-op with someone for example when you have reached a point in the game where the city you are in has been devastated and the other player is still in the early stages of an alien invasion. If on the otherhand you did matchmaking based on version installed - How would you deal with diminishing player levels at the front end of the game i.e. new gamers would struggle to find others for co-ops. If you are talking more on the scale of the introduction of advanced weaponry or similar gear aspects then why wouldn't I want the best immediately.

From a games development point of view i.e. learning how to make games it might carry a certain amount of cachet but I struggle to understand your concept fully I think. More specifics on what is in a patch implementation would be appreciated.


I must admit though your last post compared to your original post has kind of thrown me for a loop. Now I am not sure whether you were initally addressing a technical issue or a content issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A patch should be a better than the previous one, there should be no reason to not download it. If it introduces a new mechanic (like a new set of units) then add an option to disable it (treat it like a mod). There should be no players playing different versions if possible (especially if they play multiplayer, in such case they should be forced to upgrade to the newest version before they can play with others).

Yes, there will be a small portion of the player base that will be unhappy because the patch changed some minor thing that they liked previously better, but they have to deal with it. We can't make separate games adjusted for each player...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Acharis' timestamp='1330081710' post='4916163']
We can't make separate games adjusted for each player...

Can't we?
[/quote]We can't :D We have no budget for this :) And even if we had the budget for this it would me much better to spend it on something else instead. Well, if our pricing strategy is like 1,000$ per unit then it might look different then :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

GameDev.net is your game development community. Create an account for your GameDev Portfolio and participate in the largest developer community in the games industry.

Sign me up!