I'm just wondering about this patch. I notice it comes from the developer
with no technical support from EA and it's not an official EA patch. Does
this means EA wouldn't pay ISI to patch the game? There's no mention on the
site that the patch could be followed by an official patch, it seems to say
on the contrary that future patches will also be developer patches.
If that's the case I say kudos to ISI for caring enough to finish the game,
and shame on EA for not giving a damn (again).
Simon.
Many times the developer with issue the patch like this
for us to test. Only after extensive testing will the distributor
take on the patch. This could be one such case.
--
[email hidden]
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:XBLM7.23905$[email hidden]...
> I'm just wondering about this patch. I notice it comes from the developer
> with no technical support from EA and it's not an official EA patch. Does
> this means EA wouldn't pay ISI to patch the game? There's no mention on
the
> site that the patch could be followed by an official patch, it seems to
say
> on the contrary that future patches will also be developer patches.
>
> If that's the case I say kudos to ISI for caring enough to finish the
game,
> and shame on EA for not giving a damn (again).
>
> Simon.
>
>
You're probably right. I guess we'll have to wait and see if an official
patch arrives.
"Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:MSMM7.77$[email hidden]...
> Many times the developer with issue the patch like this
> for us to test. Only after extensive testing will the distributor
> take on the patch. This could be one such case.
> [email hidden]
The ISI patch works just fine. Keep a spare set of yer fav setups & mods;
reinstall the original game if the 1.0.7.4 patch (aka "update #1") doesn't
work for you.
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:XBLM7.23905$[email hidden]...
> I'm just wondering about this patch. I notice it comes from the developer
> with no technical support from EA and it's not an official EA patch. Does
> this means EA wouldn't pay ISI to patch the game? There's no mention onthe
> site that the patch could be followed by an official patch, it seems tosay
> on the contrary that future patches will also be developer patches.
>
> If that's the case I say kudos to ISI for caring enough to finish thegame,
> and shame on EA for not giving a damn (again).
>
> Simon.
>
>
I seem to remeber this with F12000. i think it was the 1.06 patch was 'beta'
for some time before the offical 1.09 came out. EA probably just dosen't
want to be bothered.
MadDAWG
I think you may be waiting for a long long time. I don't think legalities
have anything to do with these beta or developer patches. Rather it is the
publisher wishing to avoid higher tech support costs. By releashing patches
with no technical support, the publisher avoids having to beta test the
patch and avoids having to man the phone lines when soundcard A doesn't work
with Video Card B and Motherboard y and memory Z. Surely EA supported the
patch, the EA producer during the online chat several weeks ago spoke of the
patch and almost nailed the release date, but the EA parent company will
save money by not associating itself with the patch.
However IF, and I must stress "IF" this patching process is ongoing, and
ISI continues to refine their product, we may see an official patch at some
point. Keep in mind Hasbro/MGI have release 3 'beta' patches for Nascar
Heat. I would be suprised to see a 4th official non-beta patch. And how
many of the GPL patches were official and supported? How many of the 3d
patches for the Nascar series ever left beta?
dave henrie
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:AzPM7.25266$[email hidden]...
Quoted text (12 lines)
> You're probably right. I guess we'll have to wait and see if an official > patch arrives. > > "Greg Cisko" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:MSMM7.77$[email hidden]... > > Many times the developer with issue the patch like this > > for us to test. Only after extensive testing will the distributor > > take on the patch. This could be one such case. > > [email hidden] > > >Senior Producer James Hawkins (of EA) has been working on this patch
together with the development team. They didn't want to make it an official
EA patch, because that way they can get the patch out right away, instead of
going through a lenghty testing fase. So this has been done for speed and
should be applauded. If EA didn't want to have anything to do with it, then
they'd also had not distributed it through their official website at
http://www.easportsf1.com.
Kenneth Verburg
Editor-in-chief High Gear
http://www.simracingnews.com
well on one hand yes, on the other hands not many kudos for releasing a game
without FF and a lower framerate in full screen...
but in the end it turned out quite all right...
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message de news:
XBLM7.23905$[email hidden]...
> I'm just wondering about this patch. I notice it comes from the developer
> with no technical support from EA and it's not an official EA patch. Does
> this means EA wouldn't pay ISI to patch the game? There's no mention onthe
> site that the patch could be followed by an official patch, it seems tosay
> on the contrary that future patches will also be developer patches.
>
> If that's the case I say kudos to ISI for caring enough to finish thegame,
> and shame on EA for not giving a damn (again).
>
> Simon.
>
>
I would give EA the thumbs done when it comes to the early release. Since it
didn't really take them that long to get it patched I would bet that the
orignal release was based on a "drop dead date" vs. when it was really done.
MadDAWG
It comes from the EA site - of course EA had something to do with it!
(Follow the motorsport link from easports.com.)
Iain
"Simon Brown" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:XBLM7.23905$[email hidden]...
> I'm just wondering about this patch. I notice it comes from the developer
> with no technical support from EA and it's not an official EA patch. Does
> this means EA wouldn't pay ISI to patch the game? There's no mention onthe
> site that the patch could be followed by an official patch, it seems tosay
> on the contrary that future patches will also be developer patches.
>
> If that's the case I say kudos to ISI for caring enough to finish thegame,
> and shame on EA for not giving a damn (again).
>
> Simon.
>
>
