[Question] Beta Release

[Weyland Yutani (DayZ) 1159]

If the devs are doing an update per month and the updates are 0.54, 0.55, 0.56, etc...does that mean by 0.63 that SA will be in beta?

 

Just curious.  :)

[blackberrygoo 1416]

I always thought it would be around .75 :0 they skip around a lot so who knows ...

[SMoss 2101]

If the devs are doing an update per month and the updates are 0.54, 0.55, 0.56, etc...does that mean by 0.63 that SA will be in beta?

 

Just curious.  :)

Math says it would be around that version number yes, but I would rather keep my eyes on the development timeline on the dev-hub instead of focusing on a specific version number dictating or heralding the coming of beta :)

[pilgrim* 3513]

version numbering convention ?

 

I guess by 0.56 they mean 0.5.6

So could go 0.5.6 ... / .. 0.5.9  .. 0.5.10 ..  0.5.11

[SMoss 2101]

Here we are btw (in case someone might find it useful): http://dayz.com/blog/dayz-moving-into-2015

[SMoss 2101]

version numbering convention ?

 

I guess by 0.56 they mean 0.5.6

So could go 0.5.6 ... / .. 0.5.9  .. 0.5.10 ..  0.5.11

It's more like x.xx.xxxxxx

 

The first 0.55 build was 0.55.127157 for example.

[kichilron 8550]

If the devs are doing an update per month and the updates are 0.54, 0.55, 0.56, etc...does that mean by 0.63 that SA will be in beta?

 

Just curious.  :)

 

 

version numbering convention ?

 

I guess by 0.56 they mean 0.5.6

So could go 0.5.6 ... / .. 0.5.9  .. 0.5.10 ..  0.5.11

 

 

Soooo, following that logic if every month one patch will be released we'll be at version 1.0 / release in about 54 months / 4.5 years..

 

 

That's why there's no such thing as a convention for versions. Everyone can theoretically do their own thing. We could even go to 0.1 or 0.9 from 0.55. There's no point making assumptions from version-#.

[Tatanko 5591]

version numbering convention ?

 

I guess by 0.56 they mean 0.5.6

So could go 0.5.6 ... / .. 0.5.9  .. 0.5.10 ..  0.5.11

It's more like x.xx.xxxxxx

 

The first 0.55 build was 0.55.127157 for example.

SMoss is on the money. Here's the best way I know how to explain it...

 

As pointed out above, there are three parts to the "version number". Let's use last week's Experimental build as an example:

 

0.56.127666

 

"0" in this case denotes that we are not yet at final release, 1 would indicate final release and later versions, and 2 would indicate a whole new game probably, etc.

 

The .56 part denotes a major update release at this point in their scale of version numbers. Each of these updates includes new tech, new features, map updates, and that kind of thing.

 

The .127666 part is the build number. These are a sub-version of sorts. These numbers are assigned to each and every single release, major or minor, and they give you a way of distinguishing between different releases of the same update. When we get hotfixes to an existing version of the game, these are simply a new build rather than a full update and you will notice that change in the build number. Trying to explain what each of the six numbers in the build number means would be pure speculation on my part, so I won't comment on that.

 

 

This post wasn't directed at anyone in particular, I just felt like taking the time to explain so that everyone reading the thread is on the same page :)

Edited May 12, 2015 by Tatanko

[Red_Ensign 990]

beta is when they stop trying stuff and start fixing stuff.

[pilgrim* 3513]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning

 

in fact version ordering is pretty much down to however the team does it, as long as they understand where they are

but being techno-folk they do like to pretend that it runs on cold logic

 

this is my experience

without mentioning anyone at Orange, HP, Philips or STMicroelectronics, or even (heh) SWIFT  or any other

where major/minor versions never get swapped to fit the numbers ;)

[ hi guys ! ]

 

 

EDIT : writing software is not an easy fun job. I have zero bad to say about anyone's methodology. Kudos BI

Edited May 12, 2015 by pilgrim

[Weyland Yutani (DayZ) 1159]

**NERD ALERT**

 

0.55 to 0.57 to 0.58 (and obviously 0.59 is next).

 

I figured the builds would be skipping a number since its a thing now, but maybe thats because of the extended development cycle?

[boneboys 7988]

Never ever try to apply logic to BI game release N°'s, beta RC's or other.

I gave up about 10 years ago (this advice was given by a BI Dev) and have yet to see reason to change my stance concerning this mystery.

 

The difference is between submit and commit.

[Death By Crowbar 1213]

**NERD ALERT**

 

0.55 to 0.57 to 0.58 (and obviously 0.59 is next).

 

I figured the builds would be skipping a number since its a thing now, but maybe thats because of the extended development cycle?

.56 was problematic so it was skipped and so much changed they bounced over it to .57. That happens sometimes.

 

Hicks even said in one of his latest interviews or reports that the Dean vision of weekly builds has sort of shifted, it's more like a build will be ready when it's deemed safe for Stable and has enough in it to justify it. You'd think they're trying for monthly but that's not a line in the sand truth. Also, when you think of version numbers - few development shops have a convention that is unwavering and 100% consistent. Afterall, look at Microsoft. You've got Windows 3.5, 95, 98, NT/ME/crap, Vista, 7, 8, 10. Does any of that exactly make sense when you look at it that way? No, but if you know the history of what they've done and what they're trying to do skipping the 9's is obvious. A company I used to work for had an older product that's final version was 5.0. They called it "v5". But then the new product came in development through v4.7, v4.8, v4.9 and then they decided to skip 5 all together to avoid confusion internally and with older clients. In fact, they tried to abandon the numbering convention all together and started doing stupid crap like naming the revisions after ships, such as Intrepid, Reliance, etc. Then they went back to numerics again.

 

Thus with any development shop there's some patterns that are obvious, but they don't always dictate what was or what will be. Build numbers and "conventions" tend to evolve.

[star-lord252 83]

Beta should come at the end of 2015 or early 2016. Don't listen to those people who say it'll come out in 20 years there just impatient and will be crying to get there game back because they decided to switch to "h1z1".....

[hellcat420 212]

If the devs are doing an update per month and the updates are 0.54, 0.55, 0.56, etc...does that mean by 0.63 that SA will be in beta?

Just curious. :)

It will go beta when its ready. That's the most reliable thing to go by.

[ZomboWTF 527]

version numbers dont work like regular numbers, there is no reason for 0.59 to follow with 0.60, it could also be 1.01, depending on the stage of development

just as well there doesn't need to be a version 1.00 after version 0.99, it may as well just be version 0.100.xxxx etc.

[Surviv0r1969 151]

Here we are btw (in case someone might find it useful): http://dayz.com/blog/dayz-moving-into-2015

green=done

red = incomplete

 

cant see the stuff that was planned earlier quarters that wasnt done and the stuff for last quarter being done in time for end of this year somehow

 

 

Q1 2015

• Basic vehicles
• Central economy (advanced loot distribution)
• New renderer
• New Zombie AI
• Basic stealth system (zombies, animals, ...)
• Diseases

Q2 2015

• Advanced vehicles (repair, modifications, ...)
• Advanced animals - life cycle, group behavior
• Player statistics
• New UI Stamina / fatigue
• Dynamic events

Q3 2015

• Traps
• Barricading
• Character life span + soft skills
• Animal predators + birds
• Aerial transport
• Console prototype

Q4 2015

• BETA version
• Animal companions (dog, horse)
• Steam community integration (Achievements, Steamworks modding, etc)
• Construction (building shelters / walls / ...)

rather it took longer and got it right than anything else so dont worry about version number it will be ready when its ready

Edited August 27, 2015 by surviv0r

[ColdAtrophy 1850]

-snip-

 

Player stats are being tracked, we just don't have a client connection to the statistics servers yet.

 

The new zombie AI was also done. Now they are just optimizing, something that would probably have waited til beta were it not for a new focus on Stable branch playability. 

 

I also see nothing wrong with the dynamic events in their current iteration that would prevent it from being labeled "green" according to your coloring convention.

 

Not trying to be overly critical of you, btw. I just think it bears mentioning for anyone who may not be up to date on current progress.

Edited August 27, 2015 by ColdAtrophy

[BleedoutBill 1636]

Version numbers serve only as a convenience to the devs and have little meaning outside of the studio. The designation of "Version 1.0" should have meaning, but sadly, it doesn't seem to any more (see some of the recent releases from Ubisoft, for example - these games were still clearly in a beta state :( ).

 

Not trying to be a smart ass, but we enter beta when all intended functionality is implemented and they run out of game breaking bugs to fix. The devs have provided us with a visual clue as to how close we are to that point. It can be found at the top of this page: http://dayz.com/

Edited August 27, 2015 by BleedoutBill