Since 1.3 will have loads of internal changes, wouldn't it be easier just to update from 1.8 beta(or 1.9, I'm not sure how they're going to do it) to 1.3? Please, someone show me where the flaw in my logic is.
The flaw in your logic is that other versions of minecraft exist.
Versions like:
1.0
1.2.1
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
MANY snapshots
So updating from 1.8 beta to 1.3 official would essentially require deletion of A LOT of updates, and re-implementation--something that would probably lead to more bugs because humans make errors. A lot.
It's like building a house out of obsidian and instead of adding the bed you've always wanted, you tear down the house, rebuild it, and then add the bed.
i like and prefer the way they are doing the updates now. Gives them time to make sure most if not everything is working.
Plus, if they were to go from Beta 1.8.2 all the way to 1.3, you'd have to wait a long time for that one update. I don't think people would be happy about that seeing as how they are already crying that 1.7.3 isn't out yet and the game is only a month old.
There's no flaw in your logic.
There's 3 ways 4J could do it:
1) your way. Do all the updates at once to bring it up to speed, bug test it as you go, etc. The next update with "everything" would come out in, oh, about 9 months to a year. (Course, during that year, the PC version may be to 1.4 or even 1.5, so the xbox version will forever be trying to "catch up").
2) 4J's way #1. Who says the xbox updates have to match the PC's updates version-for-version? I think what they're doing is approximately a months worth of work at a time so we get a "monthly" update. It may include most of 1.7, parts of 1.8, whatever they can fit in within that time frame. The next one might include the rest of 1.8, some of 1.9.... you get the idea.
3) 4J's way #2. They do a update by PC version. It may take a month to finish 1.7, two months to finish 1.8, whatever it works out to be.
Be interesting to see how it's all gonna work out.
I'm wondering why they didn't call the xbox version 1.0 and have it's own update numbers (1.1, 1.2, etc.). Sure would solve the confusion over the PC/xbox version upgrades.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Versions like:
1.0
1.2.1
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
MANY snapshots
So updating from 1.8 beta to 1.3 official would essentially require deletion of A LOT of updates, and re-implementation--something that would probably lead to more bugs because humans make errors. A lot.
It's like building a house out of obsidian and instead of adding the bed you've always wanted, you tear down the house, rebuild it, and then add the bed.
Plus, if they were to go from Beta 1.8.2 all the way to 1.3, you'd have to wait a long time for that one update. I don't think people would be happy about that seeing as how they are already crying that 1.7.3 isn't out yet and the game is only a month old.
There's 3 ways 4J could do it:
1) your way. Do all the updates at once to bring it up to speed, bug test it as you go, etc. The next update with "everything" would come out in, oh, about 9 months to a year. (Course, during that year, the PC version may be to 1.4 or even 1.5, so the xbox version will forever be trying to "catch up").
2) 4J's way #1. Who says the xbox updates have to match the PC's updates version-for-version? I think what they're doing is approximately a months worth of work at a time so we get a "monthly" update. It may include most of 1.7, parts of 1.8, whatever they can fit in within that time frame. The next one might include the rest of 1.8, some of 1.9.... you get the idea.
3) 4J's way #2. They do a update by PC version. It may take a month to finish 1.7, two months to finish 1.8, whatever it works out to be.
Be interesting to see how it's all gonna work out.
I'm wondering why they didn't call the xbox version 1.0 and have it's own update numbers (1.1, 1.2, etc.). Sure would solve the confusion over the PC/xbox version upgrades.