This attempt, however childish, could have an economic effect on the market for this game, and stifle development. It is so obviously an attempt to undermine the game.
I hope some Wikipedianeer out there somewhere will go and find citations for me(it wouldn't be hard), and remove this awful posting. The above quoted paragraph implies that the older version was abandoned because of personal relationship issues. Yes, they abandoned the older version of the game, but that was because they could not continue to develop a broken game.
#RUST VIDEO GAME NUDITY WOMEN CODE#
Their current code was extremely slow and prohibitive, and the in-game lag was extreme.
#RUST VIDEO GAME NUDITY WOMEN FULL#
I don't have time to find citations for what I am ABOUT to say, but this is a pretty cut-and-dry situation: The developers of the game made it in a program that was full of awful code, and coding potential, and remaking the game entirely was the only option. If someone wants to mention that maybe I am reading the citations wrong(?) At least in this article, the citations appear AFTER the information. Mentioning game issues as a result of development is misleading.
Also, this is an ALPHA game, and every single problem imaginable in an online game is, by definition, to be expected. I am not up to speed about the very last sentence, but it is NOT CITED so I presume it being a serious mark against the developers, should be removed anyway. While some negative sentiment is found among a significant amount of the player base, it is not found under this citation. At all.Ĭitation Doesn't even have anything to do with the general user base, and no comments about user 'preference' are present. In fact, there is no mention of programmers leaving period. As of June 17, 2014, a menu that gives access to both branches was released but some users noted system crashing issues and other serious technical problems as reported in the steam discussions."Ĭitation does not mention in any way anything to do with personal relationship issues as it regards to why Rust is being re-coded. Despite all the improvements shown on his weekly devblog on the new Rust Alpha Reboot version, users have expressed their preference for the original version and strong dislike of the one currently in development. This dislike made Garry Newman create an alternative version and enticed him to stop updating the original version. The reasons of their exit weren't fully explained but Garry Newman blamed it on difficult personal relationship issues and distaste for the untidy code conceived. "Two versions of Rust alpha exist, Garry Newman soon discontinued the original one because of internal issues with former programmers who quickly left the team. Or at the very least, strongly misinformed. This section is clearly personally biased.
Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.168.108.221 ( talk) 08:59, 17 March 2014 (UTC) Alpha Reboot SectionĮDIT: I am going to attempt to remove the erroneous text myself. So if I make a Twitter post that my company has made $1 billion US without any other shred of evidence then I can put it up on Wikipedia, nice. If not to get it from him, from who? - Lonaowna ( talk) 13:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC) He is one of the few people that has access to this information. 108.168.108.221 ( talk) 10:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)a Twitter might be a dubious medium, but it is still the company's owner who has published the information. I doubt a random link from someones Twitter account could accurately represent this game has already made $7.5 million dollars.
0 kommentar(er)
