PDA

View Full Version : Update 10-redo the game



Doxmaster
12-26-2010, 04:49 PM
For update 10, how about you guys completely redo the game's code?

All of it. Clean up any little problems left in from days of old, work out the most effecient way to do everything and make sure you are using the difficult to mess up versions for everything.

If memory serves, you are incapable of doing certain things with enhancement lines because of your code; update 10 would be a great time to fix that. Above all, make sure you dont ruin your future work by writing yourself into a corner.

Zardonyx
12-26-2010, 04:53 PM
That sounds great. As long as you can convince everyone to wait two to three years for update 10... while continuing to support the game financially.

Hendrik
12-26-2010, 04:55 PM
]For update 10, how about you guys completely redo the game's code?[/B]

All of it. Clean up any little problems left in from days of old, work out the most effecient way to do everything and make sure you are using the difficult to mess up versions for everything.

If memory serves, you are incapable of doing certain things with enhancement lines because of your code; update 10 would be a great time to fix that. Above all, make sure you dont ruin your future work by writing yourself into a corner.

So say the arm-chair coder.

:rolleyes:

Doxmaster
12-26-2010, 05:02 PM
That sounds great. As long as you can convince everyone to wait two to three years for update 10... while continuing to support the game financially.

Totally worth it.

Krelar
12-26-2010, 05:16 PM
If your going to completely redo the code why not just make ddo2?

jeremyt
12-26-2010, 05:18 PM
This previous coder, turned arm-chair coder's take on the arm chairness of this post:

Have you seen the revenue this game has generated since going to the f2p model? The bugs and code problems we are experiencing are really odd to me. clean, bug-free code by a very small group of coders can be designed, written tested and implemented in pretty quick and efficient time-frames. Look at the start up design companies and how much more effectively they are coding than the current DDO development team. I have a feeling with the recent influx of cash though this situation will get remedied. Remember, DDO was about to go away before it was sparked back to life by the marketing/code switch. Now all we can do is wait and hope we start drawing back some of the 'A' list coders from the more current projects back to DDO to shore up our coding/bug problem. With a talented team of coders with this much cash supporting them, it would not be years. Problem is..we need the 'A' coders, and I think that is what is lacking ATM. It will happen IMO though. Too much money being generated by DDO now to neglect it

jeremyt
12-26-2010, 05:22 PM
If your going to completely redo the code why not just make ddo2?


in effect this would be DDO2 with fully transferring characters, accounts and all the history/guilds/friends lists.

Turbine puts out new games relatively frequently, without the full transferability DDO would lose a very very large portion of its longtime players to the other newer more well-coded etc games. Making a separate DDO 2 game would cannibalize profits from ddo, split the player base. dilute the coding talent pool and most likely kill one or both projects.

shortdevils
12-26-2010, 05:28 PM
Nvm its not worth it.

SardaofChaos
12-26-2010, 05:36 PM
What if, instead, they took one section of the game and got rid of inefficiencies in that one section and added about a month to the time between update releases. Like say, they work on the code that runs collectables and collectors for Update 10. Then, they rewrite the code that runs bags to make items in bags usable for Update 11. Then, they stop working on bugs because everyone is too happy about their spell component/scroll/potion bags to notice.

ArkoHighStar
12-26-2010, 06:07 PM
This previous coder, turned arm-chair coder's take on the arm chairness of this post:

Have you seen the revenue this game has generated since going to the f2p model? The bugs and code problems we are experiencing are really odd to me. clean, bug-free code by a very small group of coders can be designed, written tested and implemented in pretty quick and efficient time-frames. Look at the start up design companies and how much more effectively they are coding than the current DDO development team. I have a feeling with the recent influx of cash though this situation will get remedied. Remember, DDO was about to go away before it was sparked back to life by the marketing/code switch. Now all we can do is wait and hope we start drawing back some of the 'A' list coders from the more current projects back to DDO to shore up our coding/bug problem. With a talented team of coders with this much cash supporting them, it would not be years. Problem is..we need the 'A' coders, and I think that is what is lacking ATM. It will happen IMO though. Too much money being generated by DDO now to neglect it

The problem is most of the current coding team isn't the original coding team, so they are supporting and developing on top of someone else code base, and speaking form experience this is full of pitfalls and not a fun experience.

Nite_Prowler
12-26-2010, 08:05 PM
The problem is most of the current coding team isn't the original coding team, so they are supporting and developing on top of someone else code base, and speaking form experience this is full of pitfalls and not a fun experience.

Yea, Im no coder but I can relate to that kind of issue.

wemery73
12-26-2010, 08:09 PM
If your going to completely redo the code why not just make ddo2?

/agree

DannyYea
12-26-2010, 08:11 PM
I'd like to see a Goblin NPC called Splits, and he sells you class-a drugs for 2plat.

Lorien_the_First_One
12-26-2010, 08:12 PM
For update 10, how about you guys completely redo the game's code?

All of it. Clean up any little problems left in from days of old, work out the most effecient way to do everything and make sure you are using the difficult to mess up versions for everything.

If memory serves, you are incapable of doing certain things with enhancement lines because of your code; update 10 would be a great time to fix that. Above all, make sure you dont ruin your future work by writing yourself into a corner.

LMAO, OMG that's great! Redo the entire game's code in a few weeks. Yeah, perfect idea. Totally possible.

Do you have any clue what the resources required to do that would be? MMOs are years in development, even if they use an existing game engine, and apparently you want to scrap the game engine too.

Should they put some effort into continued bugfixing, oh yeah. But redo all the code? lol, good luck with that one.

DannyYea
12-26-2010, 08:20 PM
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/1827/thebritisharecomingrofl.jpg

Zorth
12-26-2010, 08:35 PM
I have made games before, Bugs are rampant when new ideas surface. They are just a natural part of making a game. Some bugs take months to straighten out. Just one line of code that is missed will eventually be caught and corrected, but for billions of lines of code that can take a long time. I want to salute the developers on making an effort to correct the important bugs first and for the many pots of coffee they must brew to check billions of lines of code. It is not easy. Like I said I used to program sword and board games. So yah.

balancetraveller
12-26-2010, 08:40 PM
LMAO, OMG that's great! Redo the entire game's code in a few weeks. Yeah, perfect idea. Totally possible.

Do you have any clue what the resources required to do that would be? MMOs are years in development, even if they use an existing game engine, and apparently you want to scrap the game engine too.

Should they put some effort into continued bugfixing, oh yeah. But redo all the code? lol, good luck with that one.

OP apparently has no whatsoever idea about either coding or making a game, why bother? :P

Doxmaster
12-27-2010, 06:36 AM
I have 0 coding experience and I feel ABSOLUTELY NO SHAME about it; I am sitting in three different armchairs as I speak about coding and I'm loving it. This is something they'll really have to do eventually no matter how arduous a task it will be; might as well suggest they do it soon.

frznvimes
12-27-2010, 07:08 AM
While they're at it, make it a live action movie starring Bill Murray instead of a game. It can be about a sports team that has to pass the bar exam before they're allowed to play professional lawn bowling. Oh yeah, and they're all rabbits with voice overs.

PopeJual
12-27-2010, 07:14 AM
While they're at it, make it a live action movie starring Bill Murray instead of a game. It can be about a sports team that has to pass the bar exam before they're allowed to play professional lawn bowling. Oh yeah, and they're all rabbits with voice overs.

I would totally watch that.

stockwizard5
12-27-2010, 08:13 AM
Sort of what I am thinking ...

1. Long Slow Death 2006-2009 (although hotly debated this has been decided)
2. FTP Huge Boost 2009-2010 (at least perception, population, content)
3. Return of Death 2010 - ???? (the debate returns but evidence is mounting)

If the choice is no DDO or do something - then I vote do something ...

If the vote is do something then I vote do something while resources exist and success is still being briefed to management on those powerpoint slides.

ps: How can myddo still list the top reknown on Thelanis as level 54?

sweez
12-27-2010, 08:46 AM
Update 10: The Fix Of The Ladder Bug

Odium
12-27-2010, 08:50 AM
For update 10, how about you guys completely redo the game's code?

All of it. Clean up any little problems left in from days of old, work out the most effecient way to do everything and make sure you are using the difficult to mess up versions for everything.

If memory serves, you are incapable of doing certain things with enhancement lines because of your code; update 10 would be a great time to fix that. Above all, make sure you dont ruin your future work by writing yourself into a corner.

I would assume that this would be very resource and time intensive. Why would they want to take the game back to unprofitability? It will be around in its current form for the life of the game i would guess. A few complaints here and there about it but overall not many will care. Content would be a better use of resources due to the fact that alot of people seem to get burnt out while waiting for some new quests and what not.

ssgcmwatson
12-27-2010, 09:51 AM
OP apparently has no whatsoever idea about either coding or making a game, why bother? :P


I have 0 coding experience and I feel ABSOLUTELY NO SHAME about it; I am sitting in three different armchairs as I speak about coding and I'm loving it. This is something they'll really have to do eventually no matter how arduous a task it will be; might as well suggest they do it soon.

This is starting to remind me of trying to debate about military strategy and tactics with people who've never been shot at.

Lagin
12-27-2010, 10:50 AM
:
http://i299.photobucket.com/albums/mm299/chefricochet/animated/th_1sm213sharepopcorn.gif?t=1293468608 (http://s299.photobucket.com/albums/mm299/chefricochet/animated/?action=view&current=1sm213sharepopcorn.gif)

silvermesh
12-27-2010, 12:05 PM
This is starting to remind me of trying to debate about military strategy and tactics with people who've never been shot at.

easy, just put your finger in the barrel of their gun, then instead of shooting you, the barrel blows up like a banana peel. I win at War AND life.

..right?

Dakotahorn
12-27-2010, 12:27 PM
If your going to completely redo the code why not just make ddo2?

I have it on good authority that DDO2 is already in the works.... 4e based.

shortdevils
12-27-2010, 12:31 PM
I have it on good authority that DDO2 is already in the works.... 4e based.

It wont be ready before december 21,2012. So meh!

Dakotahorn
12-27-2010, 12:37 PM
It wont be ready before december 21,2012. So meh!

Took me a second to get that... lol

As a general rule of thumb, I try to ignore anyone's advice that claims to know the future... that's not around anymore.

zorander6
12-27-2010, 12:40 PM
Took me a second to get that... lol

As a general rule of thumb, I try to ignore anyone's advice that claims to know the future... that's not around anymore.

Due to some miscalculations the end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine) will actually be 12/13/2013 (only because there isn't a 13'th month.)

KingofDiamondz
12-27-2010, 12:45 PM
If you dont like the game the way it is, then dont play it. Bugs will always exist, no game is 100% perfect.

Doxmaster
12-27-2010, 01:47 PM
This is starting to remind me of trying to debate about military strategy and tactics with people who've never been shot at.

A decent analogy, until you consider the fact that those who learn/study military strategy do not get shot at until long after they have learned a great deal about it, if they get shot at at all. Likewise, those who often do get shot at probably do not know the nuances of ancient and recent strategies as well as those who dont get shot at.

flynnjsw
12-27-2010, 01:50 PM
A decent analogy, until you consider the fact that those who learn/study military strategy do not get shot at until long after they have learned a great deal about it, if they get shot at at all. Likewise, those who often do get shot at probably do not know the nuances of ancient and recent strategies as well as those who dont get shot at.

This may be true if the term "Mustang" did not exist.

rexservorum
12-27-2010, 01:57 PM
I think "armchair coder" could use some work as far as insults go. I know what it means, but I personally do not know any programmers who do their coding standing up. They all seem to use a chair for this purpose, and frequently those chairs will have arms. :D

Loromir
12-27-2010, 02:07 PM
Well, we all know that DDO (or any online game for that matter) can't last fo ever in its current form. My guess is that the powers that be at Turbine already have a plan for "DDO 2.0". All successful business have a plan for the future. Since Warner Bro's owns them now, I have to beleive that either Turbine already had a plan in place that appealed to WB or WB had some Idea that Turbine makes feasable. Either way, be assured, there are plans for the future, just when that future arrives is anyone's guess. My hope is that DDO is in some way a part of that future.

Doxmaster
12-27-2010, 02:18 PM
I think "armchair coder" could use some work as far as insults go. I know what it means, but I personally do not know any programmers who do their coding standing up. They all seem to use a chair for this purpose, and frequently those chairs will have arms. :D

As far as I can tell, it has some of the following meanings:
*I do not know what I am talking about.
*I code very little, or only casually.
*I am only versed in the theory of coding, sitting from an airchair instead of at a desk where an actual coder would be.

I accept all of these things. Despite this bieng the internet, where I could claim to have written Paradise Lost into a video game code while swordfighting George W Bush Senior and Junior at the same time, I accept being an 'armchair coder', if I am not less than that. It is true enough for our purposes, though I cannot help but feel it was suppose to have some kind of negative connotation attached to it.

That has no influence on the fact that I am right though. If they Devs are having trouble working with the current code to do the basic things they want to do, it is obvious, even to an armchair coder, that they need revamp what they have before they move on and make more of a mess.

Here is my argument, cut down to it's most basic form:
*The Devs can barely work with what they have right now. They'll need to fix it eventually; they might as well start soon.

If this is wrong, tell me why.

Lorien_the_First_One
12-27-2010, 02:43 PM
I have it on good authority that DDO2 is already in the works.... 4e based.

You're sister's friend's brother's uncle told you so right?

There is a semi-MMO version of 4.0 D&D being released through another publisher by Atari at some point in the future. Maybe that's what you are thinking of.

Chai
12-27-2010, 03:11 PM
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:l4npRqguWouNaM:http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2009/4/9/633748533114571260-sarcasm.jpg&t=1

If the game fails that hard, why do people claim this and still play?

Cyr
12-27-2010, 03:15 PM
Here is my argument, cut down to it's most basic form:
*The Devs can barely work with what they have right now. They'll need to fix it eventually; they might as well start soon.

If this is wrong, tell me why.

From your posts in this thread it seems there are two different things in code that you are rightly noticing could be improved on Turbine's end.

The first is the broken or inefficient code. This would be stuff which causes memory leaks and uses up excessive resources resulting in lag. Generally yes this is a go back and fix it issue. On the plus side it also ends up being very small segments of code that are faulty or can be dramatically improved. Finding these often is the real issue. This will take real time and effort and will be a total waste if Turbine does not implement proper procedures throughout their design process meant to eliminate this sort of thing from getting into the game in the first place. Otherwise you are always fighting a losing battle. If you drastically reduce the new 'junk' code from being introduced to the game they might be able to actually gain ground in this respect.

The second issue is a manner of coding in a way that makes future coding easier. This is really not something that is best done in one big fell swoop. Often, it is easier to focus on one specific aspect at a time and re-write this to make everything of that sort easier in the future. Things like how enhancements, abilities, classes, spells, and abilities would be easy targets for this sort of thing.

Basically instead of hard coding something in, you end up creating a box with a whole bunch of little boxes inside with each of these little boxes containing some piece of information about the big picture you are describing with the 'box'. You end up having lots of un-used little boxes (variables, classes, etc in coding terms) for each big box so that your big box can contain enough little special little boxes to describe anything you want to describe with that big box. In this case you could call a big box a spell with little boxes inside containing it's name, spell level, classes that can cast it, cool down, spell point cost (if you wanted to tweak some types of spells or specific spells to be cheaper more expensive in the future), damage dice, type of damage dice, damage types, if SR applies...and the list goes on. At the end of this you have one big huge description of each spell, but most of the fields are just default values since you don't need them for each specific spell. You then have another layer of code 'hard code' the spells into the game itself in each build to insure that all those little boxes you are using don't slow things down. Whenever you make a new spell you just fill in the right fields (and if it is something really special a new little box to describe that special part of the spell as well as how old spells handle this new little box). With this sort of thing you can also put in all sorts of neat little things to help future work like modifiers to damage, loaded dice, and modifiers to casting times. This can help internally to test out ways to balance spells in a faster manner. You can also have little boxes to describe stuff like 'don't put this spell on an item' or this spell should only be cast at level X or below on an item or this spell has this % chance of being on an item if a spell of this level should be on the item... In this way you can have all your spell boxes have an easy interface with your 'Item' boxes which gives you lots of versatility. At the end of this you have something that you can fill in a few fields of and has a very small chance of causing issues compared to hard coding in each specific spell. It also makes debugging easier in the short and long term. It's more then possible to write test code for these types of things also to make sure that the fields you filled in make sense that you can just re-use each time you want to put new spells in the game.

There are of course more then just these database/class type efforts to streamline future work. Things like test suites to automatically calculate stats for a wide variety of builds with different gear setups could be used by item and balance devs. A more robust design environment requiring fewer 'hand crafted' details for dungeons could reduce the time it takes to make a new dungeon.

Each of these second things take time up front, but when you are planning a big pass to begin with it is silly not to take the opportunity to do this sort of thing (such as the much discussed upcoming spell pass).

Yaga_Nub
12-27-2010, 03:22 PM
From your posts in this thread it seems there are two different things in code that you are rightly noticing could be improved on Turbine's end.

The first is the broken or inefficient code. This would be stuff which causes memory leaks and uses up excessive resources resulting in lag. Generally yes this is a go back and fix it issue. On the plus side it also ends up being very small segments of code that are faulty or can be dramatically improved. Finding these often is the real issue. This will take real time and effort and will be a total waste if Turbine does not implement proper procedures throughout their design process meant to eliminate this sort of thing from getting into the game in the first place. Otherwise you are always fighting a losing battle. If you drastically reduce the new 'junk' code from being introduced to the game they might be able to actually gain ground in this respect.

The second issue is a manner of coding in a way that makes future coding easier. This is really not something that is best done in one big fell swoop. Often, it is easier to focus on one specific aspect at a time and re-write this to make everything of that sort easier in the future. Things like how enhancements, abilities, classes, spells, and abilities would be easy targets for this sort of thing.

Basically instead of hard coding something in, you end up creating a box with a whole bunch of little boxes inside with each of these little boxes containing some piece of information about the big picture you are describing with the 'box'. You end up having lots of un-used little boxes (variables, classes, etc in coding terms) for each big box so that your big box can contain enough little special little boxes to describe anything you want to describe with that big box. In this case you could call a big box a spell with little boxes inside containing it's name, spell level, classes that can cast it, cool down, spell point cost (if you wanted to tweak some types of spells or specific spells to be cheaper more expensive in the future), damage dice, type of damage dice, damage types, if SR applies...and the list goes on. At the end of this you have one big huge description of each spell, but most of the fields are just default values since you don't need them for each specific spell. You then have another layer of code 'hard code' the spells into the game itself in each build to insure that all those little boxes you are using don't slow things down. Whenever you make a new spell you just fill in the right fields (and if it is something really special a new little box to describe that special part of the spell as well as how old spells handle this new little box). With this sort of thing you can also put in all sorts of neat little things to help future work like modifiers to damage, loaded dice, and modifiers to casting times. This can help internally to test out ways to balance spells in a faster manner. You can also have little boxes to describe stuff like 'don't put this spell on an item' or this spell should only be cast at level X or below on an item or this spell has this % chance of being on an item if a spell of this level should be on the item... In this way you can have all your spell boxes have an easy interface with your 'Item' boxes which gives you lots of versatility. At the end of this you have something that you can fill in a few fields of and has a very small chance of causing issues compared to hard coding in each specific spell. It also makes debugging easier in the short and long term. It's more then possible to write test code for these types of things also to make sure that the fields you filled in make sense that you can just re-use each time you want to put new spells in the game.

There are of course more then just these database/class type efforts to streamline future work. Things like test suites to automatically calculate stats for a wide variety of builds with different gear setups could be used by item and balance devs. A more robust design environment requiring fewer 'hand crafted' details for dungeons could reduce the time it takes to make a new dungeon.

Each of these second things take time up front, but when you are planning a big pass to begin with it is silly not to take the opportunity to do this sort of thing (such as the much discussed upcoming spell pass).

Is this that new fangled "object oriented" coding that all the young pups talk about. We don't need that fancy **** in COBOL. Angry old coder shouts,"Get off my code!"

Chai
12-27-2010, 03:28 PM
Sort of what I am thinking ...

1. Long Slow Death 2006-2009 (although hotly debated this has been decided)
2. FTP Huge Boost 2009-2010 (at least perception, population, content)
3. Return of Death 2010 - ???? (the debate returns but evidence is mounting)



What evidence is that exactly? For every one disgruntled old schooler that quits, more than one newbie joins up and begins guzzling store bought mana and heal pots, and buying content packs? People dont quit in vast numbers around these parts. They complain, and even threaten to quit, but do not actually leave. Out of the few who DO leave, many return and begin paying into the system again.

GeneralDiomedes
12-27-2010, 03:28 PM
Really, I think the best summary of my response to the OP is ... lol.

Now, if we want to debate the contents of a box into which none of us can see, I suppose that is a reasonable way to waste time on a lazy Monday.

lugoman
12-27-2010, 03:32 PM
This really needs to happen as DDO is written entirely in Logo.

Llewndyn
12-27-2010, 03:32 PM
<opens Sam's Teach Yourself C++ in 10 Minutes, Second Edition>
*Montage of me reading the code then wearing a sweatband while Rocky's coach screams at me, furiously typing on a Commodore 64 while "Best of Battle" plays*

Success! Here it is, please run this in an interpreter Turbine, and no royalties needed, just doin' mah job:

//DDO Awesome
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <nobugs.h>

#TYPEDEF string PVP(numRnds, h4x0r1f1c, LOLZ)

int awesome = 1;
bool lag = 0;
int NERDRAGE = 0;

class MOUNT(){
void PONY();
void DUMBIDEA();
void nerfAA();
return NERDRAGE;

int main(void)
{
char.get(name, tomes, nerfTOD);
MOUNT();
cout << "\n\nWelcome to DDO!\n\n";

while(!lag)
AWESOME();
else(FAIL);

Sarcasm(whiny, nerf, PVP);

return NERDRAGE;
};

Thanks for bringing up this awesome idea, it's visionaries like you that truly drive technology to the cutting edge and beyond. Look at me, I'm getting all teary eyed just looking at it, why did all those teams of professional coders, QA testers, and throngs and throngs of people working 12 hour days and pandering to the sometimes inane requests that people with little to no idea what they are talking about or what they are asking come up with awesome ideas.

*/ disclaimer - if you actually run that code I can ASSURE you it will Windows Millenium Edition all over your machine... you have been warned */
//edit - this is all in good fun too, and I actually DID get out my book to remember some of the stuff above, how nerdy does that make me?*/

Dakotahorn
12-27-2010, 03:37 PM
You're sister's friend's brother's uncle told you so right?

There is a semi-MMO version of 4.0 D&D being released through another publisher by Atari at some point in the future. Maybe that's what you are thinking of.

Actually close.

And no... Turbine.

weewoo0
12-27-2010, 04:29 PM
What if, instead, they took one section of the game and got rid of inefficiencies in that one section and added about a month to the time between update releases. Like say, they work on the code that runs collectables and collectors for Update 10. Then, they rewrite the code that runs bags to make items in bags usable for Update 11. Then, they stop working on bugs because everyone is too happy about their spell component/scroll/potion bags to notice.

actually... couldn't components be taken care of by adding equipment slots such as a lvl 1 spell component slot holding a max of 1000 mats accepting either the bard or divine or ranger or arcane or paladin variant?

Zardonyx
12-27-2010, 04:49 PM
actually... couldn't components be taken care of by adding equipment slots such as a lvl 1 spell component slot holding a max of 1000 mats accepting either the bard or divine or ranger or arcane or paladin variant?

Won't work - breaks for anyone who multiclasses two casting classes.

Stuff like this is decidedly nontrivial, which is why it's so amusing when someone says "oh, go take a couple of weeks and fix everything that's broken."

Zardonyx
12-27-2010, 04:54 PM
Is this that new fangled "object oriented" coding that all the young pups talk about. We don't need that fancy **** in COBOL. Angry old coder shouts,"Get off my code!"

COBOL always hate you! COBOL never forgets!

stockwizard5
12-27-2010, 05:11 PM
What evidence is that exactly? For every one disgruntled old schooler that quits, more than one newbie joins up and begins guzzling store bought mana and heal pots, and buying content packs? People dont quit in vast numbers around these parts. They complain, and even threaten to quit, but do not actually leave. Out of the few who DO leave, many return and begin paying into the system again.

Like I said the debate returns ...

I watched the decline last time and see it happening again - I realize that those that see it see it and those that don't don't - and nothing I can say or show or count is going to change anyones mind.

Either way I do hope a DDO2 or some plan after next is in the works.

RJBsComputer
12-28-2010, 11:18 PM
You have to remember that computer code is written for the computer hardware that is out on the market at the time the code is written. However as all computer hackers know, new computer hardware is being turned out at an amazing rate. This rate far out paces the rate of change of computer code. What does this mean? Have you ever tried to run a computer game you just bought on a computer system that can only run wins 3.0? Can't be done. LOL, I just had to explain to my dad why he couldn't play his Nancy Drew 1-5 on his new computer.

At the start of the 90's you had single cpu pc's. From 2000-2007ish you had dual cpu pc's. From 2007ish to now, PCs are coming out with quad processors. Hard to write computer code to keep up with that pace.

C.S.I.
12-29-2010, 10:25 PM
If they do decide to redo the game in a ultimate update, if possible. they should keep the game up and work on it in a copy of the game (i dont know if it is possible). However, if they do take it down for a couple years, I better keep gettin DDO points

silvertrit
12-29-2010, 10:27 PM
/not signed

Kza
12-29-2010, 10:37 PM
/not signed

Game has more customers/players than ever. And most of us have a great time!
Has been a blast playing on Khyber atleast last weeks. Lots and lots of lfms from lvl 1 to epic 24/7.

Angelus_dead
12-30-2010, 01:52 PM
The problem is most of the current coding team isn't the original coding team
The truth is probably a bit more extreme: there is no "current coding team" for DDO. There might be Turbine programmers who have maintenance and improvement of DDO as part of their responsibilities, but it doesn't appear that there is an actual computer programmer who has DDO as his primary job focus.

Hokiewa
12-30-2010, 01:55 PM
Actually close.

And no... Turbine.

There is certainly no evidence of this.

muffinlad
12-31-2010, 01:44 AM
The problem is most of the current coding team isn't the original coding team, so they are supporting and developing on top of someone else code base, and speaking form experience this is full of pitfalls and not a fun experience.

This. Exactly. Amen brother, amen.

muffinpastor.

Zharfie
12-31-2010, 01:57 AM
<opens Sam's Teach Yourself C++ in 10 Minutes, Second Edition>

//DDO Awesome
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>

I don't want to get more into this but ... this is why Sam's books should be burnt! ... it's clearly <cstdio> and <cstring> (or just <string>, if that's what you were looking for ;))

Aaanyway, turbine should just hire me, I'd squash a few bugs every week religiously!