|
| |
Credits :
Download :
Look for downloads on external sites:
Pokefinder.org
User Comment
Submitted by Jon on 27 January 2011
| Retrospect is one thing. Foresight is another. :) |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 27 January 2011
I'm still continuing with it because I think with a few additions it can be a lot more fun to play (re-working some of the more random elements that'll kill you without warning for example).
The problem with the testing in this case is e5frog was/possibly would have been (if it had been closed but we'd asked for volunteers) one of the testers so if he still decided to do what he did I've got no control over him.. |
User Comment
Submitted by Jon on 26 January 2011
| Well, I hope this doesn't prevent you from working on this production or sour any ambitions for other games/releases. However, the drama swirling around this release sure makes a strong case for closed beta testing. |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 26 January 2011
| That's why I haven't even bothered to ask. I know the rules and that's why I didn't release a single byte bugfix version. I repeat again, for a "bug" that has no effect on the gameplay at all apart from allowing you to see your rating which currently means nothing.. I wanted to wait till a decent amount of additions had been made before releasing a version. |
User Comment
Submitted by chatGPZ on 26 January 2011
| what moloch said. csdb isnt about "things intended for csdb" at all. it got posted, so its released and belongs here. the one and only one to blame for it beeing here is the one who released it. |
User Comment
Submitted by Moloch on 26 January 2011
Certainly no reason to delete this entry ... anytime you spread something it is released whether it's official or not. We certainly have tons of entries here on CSDb of "private/no spread" stuff not released to the public.
If this entry is deleted it certainly taints the rules of this website that everyone is forced to follow. |
User Comment
Submitted by hedning on 25 January 2011
| Well. It's at least not a crack. |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 25 January 2011
Game/crack/game, make your minds up.
It certainly isn't a case of Alpha, Beta, Final etc That kind of presumes the same person was responsible and the changes of the interim version are changes that will actually be kept for the final, which is VERY wrong ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 25 January 2011
@e5frog, I don't want to get into the whole "testing" thing AGAIN on here but suffice to say, if you weren't willing to work how I asked/needed you to, you could have just stopped. You volunteered to test it, if you can't follow instructions then it's better you leave well alone. Excuses about other apps etc causing bugs mean nothing to me as you STILL sent them to me as bugs, even stuff that was say a tweak to the code, no bug there but in they come via PM as if you'd made some magnificent discovery.. I do appreciate (as I said many times) the work you did PLAYING the game. That's what play testing is all about.
PS, really classy stopping people hitting RUN/STOP, I never even did that to you. lol |
User Comment
Submitted by enthusi on 25 January 2011
On a side-note, this is a fun exercise of the voting system. Two versions of a ported BASIC game. One of them bugfixed.
Edit:
Why not just rename this one to 'taipan beta', the other one to 'alpha' and PCB releases 'final' some magic day?
That should be ok with release-rules and also be pretty darn close to the facts as well. |
User Comment
Submitted by e5frog on 25 January 2011
I never intended for this to get here, I made the changes I wanted to be able to play it as it was meant to while waiting for the final version (and also shared it with my friends on a Swedish forum - only ONE person downloaded it). Someone posted the link elsewhere and also posted it here where it was not supposed to end up.
I find it very hard play testing a game blind, easier to find errors when looking at the code (when possible), if it's not the latest code that is offered to be play tested - isn't the playing done in vain?
If something is left out or a condition is never met the player will never notice, especially if he doesn't know what is supposed to be there.
So I got more interested in the code, which wasn't popular after a while, I had some errors when using DirMaster by Style to extract the BASIC listing (- turned to =) and had a lot of other suggestions as I have mostly programmed BASIC and not very much assembler some things looked unusual.
When comparing to the officially available code for CoCo3 I also noticed some differences and decided to share that. That was also not very appreciated. So I decided to fix it up myself.
I had also been waiting for the new thread on Lemon64 where we could discuss and suggest things about the hotted up version (that was going to be started after the bounty was released) but I haven't seen one of those yet and now I can read that it was not intended until after the final release...
Anyway, that it got here was not my doing and not my intention, I felt I couldn't discuss this with Pete anymore and took matters into my own hands and I'm not sorry about that. I'm sorry Pete can't appreciate the fan-edited preview version. The only thing missing compared to the CoCo3 version is a melody in the beginning and a few beeps here and there so it's the exact same game apart from sound in it's current state. |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 25 January 2011
@doc, I kind of got that impression as it wasn't posted originally anywhere other than that one forum but it was BOUND to spread around and if people wanted a new version there was no need to rely on e5frog to get one, just msg me. His posts on that .se forum saying things like he's thinking of adding high scores and stuff when he KNOWS I'm doing that make me think he's doing so for some odd reasons..
As for asking for it to be removed, we all know that'll never happen ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by d0c on 25 January 2011
| it looks like there is some misunderstanding going on here. this release was not intended for csdb, it was more like an intern release. while we wait for your offical release jcb. thats how i understod it and i dont think e5frog want to take your work. you should pm Groepaz about this so he can remove this release. |
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 25 January 2011
There was one "bug" mentioned previously and it's fixed, if you read my posts on MY release of the game (I don't care if it's marked as game or preview) I ask if anyone MUST HAVE the bug fixed version (the bug being something that doesn't effect the gameplay in any way whatsoever) then I'd upload it but it meant having a new release page straight away and it made more sense to wait till V1.1 was released. As nobody said MUST HAVE BUGFIX!! I took that as being, we're happy to wait..
e5frog was a pain in the arse and he actually knows that ;) He was asked to play test it and give reports, he refused to do so for about a week and kept looking through the code instead then telling me about bugs that I'd already fixed as they'd been found by people PLAYING the game. I asked him repeatedly to stop changing the code as he wasn't the coder, it got to the point where he was sending me bugs that didn't even appear in MY version of the source..
The things he's changed in this version are tweaks that were made to the gameplay (such as damage done to your ship) which were asked for by other people. There's no need for HIM to release a version he's tweaked a bit too.. Sure, do it as a trainer or something but this release is pointless.
P.S. Look at the uploaders name ;) Sure wasn't me and if you read the page on the bounty forum it specifically states it's the bounty release, pre-final version. If someone want's to upload stuff and not get their facts straight that's not my doing ;) |
User Comment
Submitted by enthusi on 25 January 2011
both were released here as full game and neither the title nor the comments on the other entry mention 'preview'.
When things get released with bugs, it is common to fix em, no?
At least its not a crack and the credits of the original coder remained.
PS: From what I know, e5frog was quite active bughunting the original release as well.
|
User Comment
Submitted by JCB on 25 January 2011
| Rather pissed off about this. e5frog has been nothing but a pain in the arse about this game and now he's taken my code and changed a couple of bytes in it when he was told the "bug" was fixed (in fact totally re-worked to make more sense) in the next version. Instead of being decent about someone else's work he's trying to take ownership of it by changing a few things when I'm ALREADY doing that. I've read the thread where he uploaded this file and he's obviously ignored all the things I've said I'm working on and is talking about attempting to implement some of them himself. Seems kind of pointless me adding the music and sound effects, the better battle code, the high score/log book, the re-working of all the other bits I was doing... |
User Comment
Submitted by Richard on 25 January 2011
| As this is an ongoing project (as mentioned on Lemon64) and the game is still not finished. I feel that it should be classed as a game preview, rather than a full game :) |
User Comment
Submitted by Skate on 25 January 2011
| Much harder and more fun compared to the earlier preview. Congratulations! |
|
|
|
 | Search CSDb |
|
| Navigate | |
|
| Detailed Info | |
|
| Fun Stuff | |
· Goofs
· Hidden Parts
· Trivia
|
|
| Forum | |
|
| Support CSDb | |
|
 |  |
|
