Counter-Strike Patch

Steam News (thanks Frans) has news of a small Counter-Strike update that has been released via the broadband delivery service: "Improved shell ejection behavior causing errors."
View : : :
16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer
1.
 
Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 12:59
1.
Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 12:59
Jul 25, 2004, 12:59
 
"Improved shell ejection behavior causing errors."
Wait, so they improved the ejection behavior to cause more errors? Or they improved the amount of errors caused?

2.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 13:55
2.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 13:55
Jul 25, 2004, 13:55
 
why on earth someone would release a whole new patch just for shell ejection i'll never know, why it was release sooo long after the game coming out i'll never know, why it was release the same day as another hl major bug effecting all hl mods i'll never know, and why it made bluesnews frontpage is totally beyond me.

3.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 14:15
indiv
 
3.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 14:15
Jul 25, 2004, 14:15
 indiv
 
and why it made bluesnews frontpage is totally beyond me.

Yeah, Blue, this was definitely material for page 7.



4.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 15:18
4.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 15:18
Jul 25, 2004, 15:18
 
because they changed something with the shell ejection in the last patch which caused many problems, this is a fix that should prevent the hl.exe memory "read" error many are getting. As for why Blue decided to put it on the page, who knows

5.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 17:52
Vek
5.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 17:52
Jul 25, 2004, 17:52
Vek
 
One of the advantages of a system like Steam is they can fix a tiny little thing thats causing problems, just one little issue that is bugging people, and have it patch everyone up automatically within minutes.

If this were, for example, Ubi Soft, you could expect a megapatch somewhere 5 or 6 months down the line, even if servers are crashing...

6.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 20:03
6.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 20:03
Jul 25, 2004, 20:03
 
why on earth someone would release a whole new patch just for shell ejection i'll never know

Why someone would complain about a vendor resolving a problem and improving the game experience for gamers I'll never know.
ZigZang
7.
 
Re: Silly, silly CS
Jul 25, 2004, 22:03
7.
Re: Silly, silly CS Jul 25, 2004, 22:03
Jul 25, 2004, 22:03
 
yeah. "advantages of a system like Steam....have it patch everyone up automatically within minutes". you're right, great idea.

Unless something happens like today. http://steampowered.com/status/status.html

This is why Steam *with no alternatives (places to get those patches)* is a horrible idea. If you put all your eggs in one basket, you're begging to get screwed.

8.
 
.
Jul 25, 2004, 22:04
8.
. Jul 25, 2004, 22:04
Jul 25, 2004, 22:04
 
One of the advantages of a system like Steam is they can fix a tiny little thing thats causing problems, just one little issue that is bugging people, and have it patch everyone up automatically within minutes.


Yeah, I guess that's worth downloading and installing a gargantuan AOL-like piece of bloatware that takes your machine down to 486-like performance.

9.
 
Re: .
Jul 25, 2004, 22:08
9.
Re: . Jul 25, 2004, 22:08
Jul 25, 2004, 22:08
 
Why someone never knows I'll never know.

10.
 
Re: .
Jul 26, 2004, 01:21
10.
Re: . Jul 26, 2004, 01:21
Jul 26, 2004, 01:21
 
Why they don't know, I don't know.... hmph. Yes, nor do I.

11.
 
Re: .
Jul 26, 2004, 01:22
Vek
11.
Re: . Jul 26, 2004, 01:22
Jul 26, 2004, 01:22
Vek
 
If steam makes your computer run at 486 speed, get a new computer.

I've been monitoring Steam's resource usage for several days here (I'm a suspicious type person.) It uses up negligible amounts of CPU and RAM when in the background, and even in the foreground, doesn't have any impact on gameplay. I just leave it running all the time. I don't even notice.

So yeah. Somethings broken with your PC if steam lags it. After running it for about a week it had used up a total of about 20 CPU -seconds-.

12.
 
Re: .
Jul 26, 2004, 03:05
12.
Re: . Jul 26, 2004, 03:05
Jul 26, 2004, 03:05
 
and how much system resources did the predecessor to Steam use?

whats that? there was no predecessor to Steam? and Half Life still managed to not only survive, but totally dominate the online gaming world for 6 years? and people still got their patches? and mods? and WON still validated the game just fine when playing online?

13.
 
Re: .
Jul 26, 2004, 03:14
13.
Re: . Jul 26, 2004, 03:14
Jul 26, 2004, 03:14
 
Wow, seenitall you are my kind of guy. Finally someone sees the light. Steam is an un-needed piece of garbage... I managed for years without it and come HL2 I am going to have to finally install it. Valve why can't you make your amazing all in one "it-slice-it-dices" miracle program OPTIONAL!

Avatar 17249
14.
 
Steam = more cash for valve
Jul 26, 2004, 06:28
14.
Steam = more cash for valve Jul 26, 2004, 06:28
Jul 26, 2004, 06:28
 
It's simple. Steam is a method of content delivery that bypasses the often draconian tactics of publishers:

http://www.joeuser.com/index.asp?c=1&AID=21895&u=0

Think of it this way, if you buy HL2 through steam, all the cash goes straight to Valve, whereas if you buy a box, a percentage goes to the publisher/distributor.

Imagine your favourite music artist distributed directly?

15.
 
Re: Steam = more cash for valve
Jul 26, 2004, 06:57
Vek
15.
Re: Steam = more cash for valve Jul 26, 2004, 06:57
Jul 26, 2004, 06:57
Vek
 
This PC goes from 'not playing HL' to 'in game playing hl' in under 15 seconds with Steam. That includes starting steam and logging in (automatically, of course), joining a favorite server, loading resources, and choosing a team.

If there's a patch, it might be 5-10 seconds longer, depending on size of patch, but I hardly even notice.

IMO, thats worth it.

16.
 
Re: Steam = more cash for valve
Jul 26, 2004, 10:01
16.
Re: Steam = more cash for valve Jul 26, 2004, 10:01
Jul 26, 2004, 10:01
 
#14, some people think we're already paying too much for games -- look at the complaints over Doom3 being $55, or (back in the day) Nintendo 64 games being $60. If the point of Steam was to bypass the draconian tactics of publishers (in effect, cutting their funds out of the picture), then where is the savings? Why is Half Life 2 still $50?

Valve's actions have historically always spoken louder than their words. Let's be incredibly generous and say that a developer gets half of the money from a game. If we don't see $50 games drop to $25 over Steam, what does that tell you?

Just like in the music industry, people can complain all they want about publishers and distributors, but sometimes, even if a CD is good and the music artist gets all the money, it's just not worth $14, and sometimes, even if a game is good and the game devs get all the money, it's not worth $50.

What's the benefit of taking out the middlemen, publishers, and store's cuts if we're still paying the same price? Valve's doing just fine with their slice now. You're just shifting the money grabbing tactics of the publisher to the developer. The consumers still don't win.

16 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
Older [  1  ] Newer