The Ultimate Site of Worms Armageddon
Worms: Armageddon => General discussion => Topic started by: Kradie on July 25, 2021, 03:40 PM
-
Here is an potential Interesting question: To my knowledge Project X was made by one or two person in mere months or a year total, and the entirety of the source code was not accessed. While 3.8 took close to a decade to make, but feature wise pale in comparison to ProjectX. Why is this?
ProjectX = Short amount of time = Lot of features = Not full access to WA source code.
WA Update = Decades = Not so many feature = Full WA source code access.
I am no developer, publisher, and so on. I am just curios on the train of thought, and process of things.
Thanks for replies.
-
All developers on this game are volunteers. All the improvements you see are done in their free time. Comparing their work is like comparing their personal life and how they manage to dedicate some free time to work on the game.
-
All developers on this game are volunteers. All the improvements you see are done in their free time. Comparing their work is like comparing their personal life and how they manage to dedicate some free time to work on the game.
Ah.... That's a good point I never thought of it in that way. I just hope that I didn't rattle some cages, I was just curious and because of that I got what I was looking for.
Thank you.
-
Here is an potential Interesting question: To my knowledge Project X was made by one or two person in mere months or a year total, and the entirety of the source code was not accessed. While 3.8 took close to a decade to make, but feature wise pale in comparison to ProjectX. Why is this?
ProjectX = Short amount of time = Lot of features = Not full access to WA source code.
WA Update = Decades = Not so many feature = Full WA source code access.
I am no developer, publisher, and so on. I am just curios on the train of thought, and process of things.
Thanks for replies.
features ≠ bugfixes
You have introduced a flawed comparison. ProjectX makes WA more unstable than original static version, official WA update makes the game more stable than static version. WA update wasn't aimed at creating new content, ProjectX was exclusively aimed at creating new content, don't know why you could/would compare the two.
-
Here is an potential Interesting question: To my knowledge Project X was made by one or two person in mere months or a year total, and the entirety of the source code was not accessed. While 3.8 took close to a decade to make, but feature wise pale in comparison to ProjectX. Why is this?
ProjectX = Short amount of time = Lot of features = Not full access to WA source code.
WA Update = Decades = Not so many feature = Full WA source code access.
I am no developer, publisher, and so on. I am just curios on the train of thought, and process of things.
Thanks for replies.
features ≠ bugfixes
You have introduced a flawed comparison. ProjectX makes WA more unstable than original static version, official WA update makes the game more stable than static version. WA update wasn't aimed at creating new content, ProjectX was exclusively aimed at creating new content, don't know why you could/would compare the two.
To be honest it is not that flawed comparison of the two, and here is why. ProjectX was most likely abandoned at early stage due to real life priorities and therefore left a lot of bugs and instability. While at the other hand WA updates were never abandoned.
If WA updates never aimed in creating new content, then why are there rumbles that there may be real time in 4.0 and other ''new'' contents? (Not counting features). WA is after all in definition a turn based strategy game not a real time strategy game.
Also, I would like to be clear I have never tried ProjectX because I have always been faithful to the main updates. Yet, what I have heard is that both features and content in ProjectX are simply revolutionary, and perhaps something may make it to future updates in Worms Armageddon (Pure conjecture).