Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 22:32:03 10/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 10, 1999 at 23:59:49, Micheal Cummings wrote: >On October 10, 1999 at 20:03:03, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On October 10, 1999 at 09:12:23, Micheal Cummings wrote: >> >>>Like I said in a previous post, CM6K had 3 patches too many. There should be >>>none. >> >>Okay, but it isn't a perfect world, and given the state of the original release, >>I'd much rather take 3 patches than none. :-) >> >>Dave > >What really gets me is the fact that the bugs are pretty easy to spot. Errors in >tutorials, some in the control features. All this takes is for someone to go >over them to check, and if someone did do this then they should be given the >sack if that is their job, because missing so many things is quite pathetic. > >I have bought many games more complex and larger than what CM6K and CM7K were. >And never had a problem nor ever needed a patch to fix bugs mainly cause there >were not any that required worrying abouut, or that you ever knew of. > >I just wonder what you would do with the Playstation or gameboy versions of >chessmaster if there were so many bugs in a program, No chance for patches >there. > >I just do not think that mindscape put in the effort in making this program that >they should. Put a pretty interface that looks pleasant, add some nice >multimedia features, sell it to the mass market. > >I just wonder how many times your system crashes and you think it was just your >computer playing up, when in fact it had to do with poor programming. In my experience, it's almost always poor progamming... sometimes my own! :-( :-) Dave
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.