How stable is this expansion? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Distant Worlds 1 Series



Message

Rtwfreak -> How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 10:49:20 AM)

I always got a lot of crashes in the other ones as the game progressed and the save file got bigger and bigger. I don't think I was ever able to finish any of them.



Shark7 -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 10:53:42 AM)

So far, I've not had a crash. This is a very stable build.



sanderz -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 11:16:19 AM)

Have played about 3 hours both with and without the hotfix and have had no problems at all.



Bingeling -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 11:29:23 AM)

It is pretty stable, but you could be unlucky. I have had an automated game run for 340 years with no crash.

In particular in ROTS, I have lost lots of games to crashes. In the shadows beta, the repeatable crashes are long gone, but it is of course possible that some nastiness is still hiding for those that manages to find the the correct data corruption in the game.



parkas3 -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 11:58:40 AM)

Rock solid for me. Played 5 hours yesterday without problems.



Raap -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 1:22:24 PM)

I've had it both ways. At the start, yesterday, it would crash about every 30 minutes or so with a clr.dll thing. Not sure of the reason for that. Then I'd have an avoidable type of crash when alt-tabbing while saving/reloading.

But in another game, I could play indefinitely without crashing, 4-5+ hours.



Shark7 -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 4:19:07 PM)

I think it is also important to ask: what OS and general system specs are you running that is experiencing crashes?

It probably also needs to be done as a bug report in the tech support board.



t1it -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 5:56:02 PM)

No problems here. Except the pirates.



wosung -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 6:08:10 PM)

Played some 8 hours in vlarge galaxy. Now got a CTD b/c of RAM overload - with 2GB RAM and apart from WinXP no other software running.

Besides: Game is even more entertaining than before this expansion. Great job!

Best regards



jesuswhywhy -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 6:10:07 PM)

so stable i can put my horse in it.

depends on ure system though just make sure ure .net and xna? are installed with distant worlds and there good



Antiscamp -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 6:21:41 PM)

Very stable indeed. I've been at it all day without any crashes or even the slightest slowdowns.

My only real problem is that the Atuuks are winning my game (!) [8|]



Bingeling -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 6:23:05 PM)

I think those with 32 bit OS is at risk of some memory related errors, in particular with very large galaxies.

Others may find some obscure crashes for Elliot to fix, in between his efforts to get rid of the above.



Erik Rutins -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 6:53:50 PM)

In general, 2GB RAM and under with 32-bit operating systems means that you will see the best performance and stability with smaller galaxies. This has been advisable for the first release. If you not have a relatively new computer, play with smaller galaxies. More than 2GB and with 64-bit operating systems (and also .NET 4.5 can help in this regard as it has better memory management) its solid as a rock here in our testing.

Regards,

- Erik



Mad Igor -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 7:04:35 PM)

well,they DID beta test after all,and release means STABLE build.
if it would be unstable,then we'd had delayed release.



Spacecadet -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 7:08:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

In general, 2GB RAM and under with 32-bit operating systems means that you will see the best performance and stability with smaller galaxies. This has been advisable for the first release. If you not have a relatively new computer, play with smaller galaxies. More than 2GB and with 64-bit operating systems (and also .NET 4.5 can help in this regard as it has better memory management) its solid as a rock here in our testing.

Regards,

- Erik



As Erik has stated, I'm using .Net 4.5 and haven't had a crash in testing for probably a month, maybe more.






Bingeling -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 7:19:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spacecadet
quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

In general, 2GB RAM and under with 32-bit operating systems means that you will see the best performance and stability with smaller galaxies. This has been advisable for the first release. If you not have a relatively new computer, play with smaller galaxies. More than 2GB and with 64-bit operating systems (and also .NET 4.5 can help in this regard as it has better memory management) its solid as a rock here in our testing.

Regards,

- Erik



As Erik has stated, I'm using .Net 4.5 and haven't had a crash in testing for probably a month, maybe more.


Then you have not tested a whole lot the last month [:D]

It depends on how you run the games, though, heavily or total automation on 4X find more crashes than slow micro management, and they reveal different kinds of issues.

The AAR I started a week ago is at 2167 if I recall correctly, the automated game started earlier today is at 2261. And neither of them have crashed, of course.




Spacecadet -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 7:24:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bingeling

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spacecadet
quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

In general, 2GB RAM and under with 32-bit operating systems means that you will see the best performance and stability with smaller galaxies. This has been advisable for the first release. If you not have a relatively new computer, play with smaller galaxies. More than 2GB and with 64-bit operating systems (and also .NET 4.5 can help in this regard as it has better memory management) its solid as a rock here in our testing.

Regards,

- Erik



As Erik has stated, I'm using .Net 4.5 and haven't had a crash in testing for probably a month, maybe more.


Then you have not tested a whole lot the last month [:D]

It depends on how you run the games, though, heavily or total automation on 4X find more crashes than slow micro management, and they reveal different kinds of issues.

The AAR I started a week ago is at 2167 if I recall correctly, the automated game started earlier today is at 2261. And neither of them have crashed, of course.



I know you had a lot of crashes, but mine were way back in the early versions.

Pretty much ran 30-40 hours a week testing with only bug killing the last several weeks.






Miep -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 8:21:30 PM)

i have still crashes ... the same like in legends :( but the nice administratoren works on it ( i hope ) ^^ but in this time ... wait :(



WoodMan -> RE: How stable is this expansion? (5/25/2013 10:38:14 PM)

I honestly haven't had a crash in DW since the last patch was introduced for Vanilla DW before the release of RoTS! That is a couple hundred hours of gaming I'd imagine. Shadows runs a lot smoother than Legends though, especially scrolling (and the speed the expansion planner updates, or am I just imagining that?)



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6445313