Regarding CAFs

[MeowingForVengeance]

Quote: Originally Posted by Skynet

For this reason (and oh how it pains me...), we cannot allow new features on CAFs post-launch. The world has decided that 'always online' games with offline features are not allowed to exist, and this is one of the prices to pay for that.

It truly does suck, but I appreciate you explaining it.

How about fighters like Esparza, Waterson, and Angela Hill, who were all there from the start? Any chance their postures and unique movement options could be added to be available for CAFs?

[JaySpray]

Quote: Originally Posted by mannyonelover

There’s also a glitch to Carlos Condit stance when you create a fighter and you go to select his stance it starts off in his original stance and then glitches with his arms down to someone else’s stance, you can obviously watch it literally just glitch.Like it skips the animation after 3 seconds! I wonder if They noticed this? Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

I'm not seeing this one happening in-game, could you post a video for reference?

I feel like you're just noticing the change of animations during active gameplay. There are different styles & layering applied to the locomotion animations of fighters which changes depending on their distance between the two. This has always existed since launch, and has not changed as far as I'm aware. Curious to find out what exactly you're seeing that I'm not though!

[mannyonelover]

Quote: Originally Posted by JaySpray

I'm not seeing this one happening in-game, could you post a video for reference? I feel like you're just noticing the change of animations during active gameplay. There are different styles & layering applied to the locomotion animations of fighters which changes depending on their distance between the two. This has always existed since launch, and has not changed as far as I'm aware. Curious to find out what exactly you're seeing that I'm not though!

Just go to CAF and go to stance then choose Carlos Condit you will notice after 3 seconds he loses his original Thai stance that he had an UFC2 to something else , it’s strange it’s the only stance that glitches like this if you don’t believe me scroll through all of them? It’s bugged....


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Skynet]

Quote: Originally Posted by iHazCode

I am a software engineer and understand these scenario's suck, but the people playing offline would in fact be forced to patch when they sign in. Couldn't you add a flag to the offline data and if the versions don't line up indicate to the poor soul that their data is corrupted and prompt them to delete their beloved save? Reality is that this kind of things happens in all type of software, and it sucks the amount of extra code that needs to be written for these contingencies, but if you foresee this franchise continuing I think it's an inevitable thing. Unless your just saying there isn't the bandwidth for it in this iteration which I can totally understand. Not trying to sounds all "I'm a programmer too, this is how you do it", just thought I'd share my experience in hopes that there is any chance it is relevant for you. I end up running into all the flakey stuff myself, so I'm the dude on S/O who always ends up asking a question only to get an answer stating "please share the solution when you find it". Granted this is usually because I repeatedly get stuck working on projects which are on near bleeding edge tech that hasn't been properly GA'd before we start targeting it as par of our tech stack.

There are actually some measures in place, but not enough. The problem is this can't be patched, because the whole problem arises from users playing the base game (with no patch updates) with patched save-data. The game is not 'always online', which means they are not forced to update if they don't have a connection, so we're kind of hooped there.

Some of the save-data things fail gracefully, some don't. The ones that do not, are stuck that way forever, since the base game cannot be updated.

[AydinDubstep]

Thanks dude! A bit sad but oh well, I'll live

[theonlywoj]

Quote: Originally Posted by Skynet

users playing the base game (with no patch updates) with patched save-data

what kind of monster would do such a thing?

the base game doesn't know the patched save-data is not compatible, and that breaks the game

same would be true if my friend has the game with patch 1 and I bring my save data on a USB from patch 2+, right?

BUT

can the patched save-data "know" that it is not compatible with the base game?

If the base game looks for a value to be "x" to indicate a file is save data (like a created fighter) for the game, can the patched game instead look for that value to be y? New save-data, created with the patch, has that value as a "y", so base game data looks for "x" and would ignore "y" (wouldn't "think" it's a created fighter file). Although, since you can't update the base game, this value that can be keyed off of would have to be something already implemented.

[Skynet]

Quote: Originally Posted by theonlywoj

Although, since you can't update the base game, this value that can be keyed off of would have to be something already implemented.

Therein lies the problem.

[RetractedMonkey]

Would you be able to implement a warning note in future games that doesn’t allow someone to boot up the game until they update it if this is detected?


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports