VN Ren'Py Harem Hotel [v0.18.2] [Runey]

[TheDevian]

I guess that I've been playing video games for so long (since Pong) that I've just gotten used to being able to interpret various version formats.

I have too, but I have Asperger's or something, and I details like that always bother me, even when I understand the situation. Rather than 0.1 - 0.9 my minds says it should be 0.01 - 0.09, then 0.10 follows.

The problem is you're applying the wrong rules.

A version number is not a "number", where 0.5 means 1/2. It's a set of values separated by a ".". Version 0.5 is Version "0" "." "5". 0.10 is "0" "." "10".

Exactly what I said, version numbers are not 'real numbers' and the decimal points are not that. All the normal rules go right now the window, and they can do whatever they want. They used to use things like v3.73r823, but we got lazy, and now, it's 1.3434.24.35.whatever...

 

[Mathesar]

Wait, wait. Are you claiming that there are public builds of .01 to .99 of Warcraft III somewhere out there? Surely you know that the earliest launch build is the 1.0 build, right? Obviously if the initial version represents the whole that means that the developer considered it a full game. That's what "1.0" means. It's whole. Anything below 1.0 is not whole and is the fractional percentage that the game state is at. e.g. .08 = 8/100 = 8% complete relative to the whole.

Actually, my point was the middle number. There are a whole bunch of revisions between 1.3.0 and 1.30.0, which is also a good example of the system not being a decimal system. Sometimes I wonder if a different separator might be less confusing for newbies, since the use of . seems to be the issue. A vertical bar, perhaps? v1|32|5?

 

[harem - king]

No, 0.08 does NOT mean 8% complete.

Version numbers do NOT work that way.

Often 1.0 is the first complete release version. But often it is not. The numbers themselves do not indicate any progression value, other than larger numbers come after smaller numbers.

You must be registered to see the links

Uh, you read what it had to say about pre-release versioning, right?

"Some systems use numerical versions less than 1 (such as 0.9), to suggest their approach toward a final "1.0" release. This is a common convention in

You must be registered to see the links

"

 

[SirWilliam]

Does somebody know what to do here ? View attachment 643528

it's R

 

[Runey]

You must be registered to see the links

Guys, go fap to ashley. We're moving on to 10th build, and I have no idea when the game will end ;p

 

[goobdoob]

Exactly what I said, version numbers are not 'real numbers' and the decimal points are not that. All the normal rules go right now the window, and they can do whatever they want. They used to use things like v3.73r823, but we got lazy, and now, it's 1.3434.24.35.whatever...

There's a piece of software called TeX that has a very odd version number - it's heading towards pi, and each new version adds on a new digit.

You must be registered to see the links

Uh, you read what it had to say about pre-release versioning, right?

"Some systems use numerical versions less than 1 (such as 0.9), to suggest their approach toward a final "1.0" release. This is a common convention in

You must be registered to see the links

"

Of course I know that. Care to guess what I work on? Open source software!

Read again what I wrote. "No, 0.08 does NOT mean 8% complete." and "Often 1.0 is the first complete release version. But often it is not."

Spitting out an example that says some systems start at < 1 and work up to 1 for the release doesn't refute what I said. Not all devs do that; some say 1.0 is the first release and go up from there. There's no requirement to do things a certain way, other than the logical "if you use numbers, they should go up".

 

[c3p0]

There's a piece of software called TeX that has a very odd version number - it's heading towards pi, and each new version adds on a new digit.

You must be registered to see the links

Of course I know that. Care to guess what I work on? Open source software!

Read again what I wrote. "No, 0.08 does NOT mean 8% complete." and "Often 1.0 is the first complete release version. But often it is not."

Spitting out an example that says some systems start at < 1 and work up to 1 for the release doesn't refute what I said. Not all devs do that; some say 1.0 is the first release and go up from there. There's no requirement to do things a certain way, other than the logical "if you use numbers, they should go up".

Only to add.
I would even say that the only thing about version number you can convert from "normal" numbers is they use the same numerics like real "numbers" at least if you use the same numeral system to compare.

The rest is enterily up to the dev itself and do or do not have a coherent logical order. And sometimes even the dev itself can't really explain what he ha done.

But I agree we Runey we should concentrate on the important things here, so I go and enjoy Ashley

 

[orrochimaru]

my all saves got deleted could anyone share their save files please?

 

[Barovaro]

Not sure if this has been answered but what game does Kali refer to when doing her first anal scene?

 

[sweesh]

Just wondering: are alpha and beta versions compiled only for windows?

 

[I'm Not Thea Lundgren!]

Just wondering: are alpha and beta versions compiled only for windows?

Yes, usually. They are for testing and not meant for wide distribution.

 

[Miho1234]

The date system is great for something that doesn't have a defined end point but is out of beta, like operating systems. Linux just updates forever. Very much agree on the Android naming scheme being mostly useless. They're alphabetical, but the actual version number gives more information.


Don't download v0.10. It's an incomplete alpha. It will most likely break your save and barely has any content anyway. There's a discussion about this all through the last few pages. Either grab v0.9.2 or wait until v0.10 is out of beta and has a public release.

I see... thanks for the info Mathesar. guess i'll wait for the beta then.

 

[Ulises233]

Couldn't the alpha download links be within a spoiler tag? I'm not familiar with the site mechanics, but if possible it would save a lot of tears and frustration with people mistakenly donwloading that and believing it to be the whole game.

 

[allenandarth]

i made a new save file separated on my 0.9 to see the new content and never used my real save files, i also still have 0.9 with me and i made a backup folder just in case, i'm safe, remember people take good care of your save files there's nothing wrong with it( maybe, i'm kinda paranoid about it), i did like the content we got, although i'm still praying for more Sexy Secretary content and i want to Smash Autumn(Bend down her religion, Down with Capitalism, for the Motherland that kinda stuff)

 

[Deleted member 929426]

i made a new save file separated on my 0.9 to see the new content and never used my real save files, i also still have 0.9 with me and i made a backup folder just in case, i'm safe, remember people take good care of your save files there's nothing wrong with it( maybe, i'm kinda paranoid about it), i did like the content we got, although i'm still praying for more Sexy Secretary content and i want to Smash Autumn(Bend down her religion, Down with Capitalism, for the Motherland that kinda stuff)

I'm used to playing games like Skyrim where the mantra is always to save and backup often. Whenever an update to this game starts coming around, I'll always create a zip of my current saves and put them someplace safe.

Couldn't the alpha download links be within a spoiler tag? I'm not familiar with the site mechanics, but if possible it would save a lot of tears and frustration with people mistakenly donwloading that and believing it to be the whole game.

Technically, this is considered a "Pirate" site, so there really aren't any rules against posting links to any "official" or "leaked" content. Even if there was, I'm fairly certain that many of those posting here had downloaded the game from somewhere else. The best we can do is grit our teeth and try to educate those people inexperienced with gaming, etc. and hope that someone is actually paying attention.

 

[goobdoob]

Couldn't the alpha download links be within a spoiler tag? I'm not familiar with the site mechanics, but if possible it would save a lot of tears and frustration with people mistakenly donwloading that and believing it to be the whole game.

The big "v0.10 ALPHA" right above the link doesn't clue them in?

 

[Kiskocya]

Very much agree on the Android naming scheme being mostly useless. They're alphabetical, but the actual version number gives more information.

A long time ago, I read an interesting article that basically said that different versioning schemes serve different purpose for different people. (I lost the link to it a long time ago)
- Sales people (and users) like the major.minor.patch scheme because it helps them track new features
- Support people need to know which version contain which bugs, and which version contains the fix for said bug, so for them a build number work better.
- Developers don't care about the product after the release, only about the branch they're currently developing (or maintaining). For them, a branch name is all they need to know.
The Android version is an example of developer culture creeping into mainstream. (I agree with you that it's not great, but google has to maintain a nerdy image, eh)

 

[TheDevian]

The big "v0.10 ALPHA" right above the link doesn't clue them in?

Sadly, too many are not willing to read that much, or don't realize what 'alpha' means.

 

[Kiskocya]

Autism and/or OCD can make our minds scream out when we see things that go against what we think they should be. Math/Numbers have rules, and version numbers ignore most of them.

Oh, if you want rules, you can feast your brain on

You must be registered to see the links

There's a broad consensus around semver.
(with --of course-- the unwritten rule that you must break at least one of those rules ;-) )

Rather than 0.1 - 0.9 my minds says it should be 0.01 - 0.09, then 0.10 follows.

Makes sense. I've worked with a few projects that did this.
On the plus side, the alphabetical ordering and version ordering is the same (when you have a bunch of versions in a folder, they list in the 'right' order)
On paper, it looks good, but in practice, all these versions look the same, and it becomes a blur.

 

[Knox_xx]

Wait, wait. Are you claiming that there are public builds of .01 to .99 of Warcraft III somewhere out there? Surely you know that the earliest launch build is the 1.0 build, right? Obviously if the initial version represents the whole that means that the developer considered it a full game. That's what "1.0" means. It's whole. Anything below 1.0 is not whole and is the fractional percentage that the game state is at. e.g. .08 = 8/100 = 8% complete relative to the whole.

war3 is a big game , from a big company, they have enough money to finish develope the game before release ,
compare that to small devs that solo developing a game while maintaining a 9to5 job is ridiculous, they have to release small patches first to gain patrons , and slowly moving toward a finished game