I hope the coders on Vanguard are more awake than their producers (emphasis mine), from their Update 4 production notes:
“We Have Helms!
Visible helmets are making their long awaited debut, and thanks to the hard work of our amazing art team, you’ll have dozens of different models available. From the (actual names of helms will go here along with photos) – there’s a variety of helmets that will compliment almost any armor set. “
I don’t know that I’m going to get time to play another game right now, but after a couple of weeks I was utterly burned out on Ruins of Kunark. The solo content was excellent fun but there was just nothing to segue you into group play.
I considered buying Guitar Hero 3 or Mass Effect, but I don’t want anything I think I might get hooked on.
My plan is to approach VSoH like a complete gamer. I’ve read nothing online. The only class I remember from beta is the bard, which I somehow didn’t like. I’ve read no lore, and I don’t plan to read any websites or guides. If the game doesn’t tell me, I won’t know.
I’m also dabbling with the notion of redoing playgate – our patcher, as an at home hobby project – probably not a project that will go anywhere since it means re-re-learning some basic Windows programming stuff but … at the very least I might have a better idea how to build a more future-proofed patcher/launcher than the one we have (which struggles with Vista). And unlike the client guys, I can make the host side work the way I want it without having to badger someone else ;)
Any recommendations on Windows programming materials welcome – as much as my curiosity leans towards learning C#, this isn’t the right project for it. I just got done converting all the strcpys and snprintfs and fopens to 2008 strcpy_ses, sprintf_ses and fopen_ses.
I dislike Microsoft’s decision to go to “pass me the address of the place you want me to store this value so I can pass you a success/failure return value”.
FILE* fp = fopen(“file”, “r”);
if ( fp == NULL )
FILE* fp = NULL;
if ( fopen_s(&fp, “file”, “r”) != 0 || fp == NULL )
I can understand the separating the return value from the return result but by requiring me to pass in the pointer you create another opportunity for error and force me to do an extra test – it is, after all – bad coding practice to assume pointers aren’t NULL.