Thank you, Dhruin <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" />
If I had a fairy approaching me and granting me 5 wishes after I made a choice => bugs or game balance. I'd choose bugs to have fixed first => crashes (I didn't encounter, but I read all your probs and am very sad about this)
morphing equipment => I didn't know this could pop up again. It was solved! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/puppyeyes.gif" alt="" />
overloading => I'd be very sad to lose an item (was solved in one version before <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> )
plot stoppers => the worst, you English can't know due to your version, were solved. And I wish, the new ones I see here, will be fixed. The alchemist bug popped up in the newer versions (from 1.2 on?)
Conclusion => I'm a dunce when it comes to programming, too abstract for me. But I have this picture about patch programming => a value is changed at location X by intention - and changes location Y (unnoticed), due to language versions, patch differences, OS differences etc. And now, reading the new probs some have with 1.41 (haven't installed it myself) - I ask myself, why? How for programmers to track this down? How was the gamer procedure? Did the gamer start the game at 1.1 and then patched up to 1.4 during the game - then to 1.41 much later? Or started from scratch with 1.4? Or, even worse => I started my German version with 1.0 - continued then with 1.1 - later 1.2 - later 1.3. Some Germans played with 1.2 at once - and then patched to 1.3 => there are differences.
So, how can QA and testing work, if the small team has to take all this (and far more) into consideration? I wonder how... this is why I wish peace for the Larians and to concentrate on bugs atm. Am I so wrong?
Kiya
