Does anyone else thing that the 1.22c patch size was considerably large for a small handful of hot fixes? Not complaining about the size or anything like that, just curious if theres future content buried in the data.
Only mentioning because past hotfix patches have been 10x smaller which makes me think theres some future content/items buried in there..
Dat miners will soon tell if this is the case.
(It's been a slow news week, hungry for news :D)
Patch 1.23c size?
Printable View
-
06-28-2012, 03:46 PMAvraymPatch 1.23c size?
-
06-28-2012, 03:49 PMKiriA500
We got the 1.23c patch before 1.23? Neat!
-
06-28-2012, 03:54 PMSeirra_Lanzce
.... 1.22c :)
http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...l=1#post738272 -
06-28-2012, 04:49 PMAvraymGod damn it! And its in the bloody title of all things.Quote:
Originally Posted by KiriA500
-
06-28-2012, 05:34 PMColinoEvery hotfix "includes" the full patch as well (in this case, 1.22c also includes all of 1.22).Quote:
Originally Posted by Avraym
-
06-28-2012, 07:47 PMChreesPartially true! Each of the lettered patches are their own entities, but when hotfixes require an update (sometimes they've been patches to the server instead), they include all of the lettered patch they're associated with. In this case, today's patch included both the hotfixes and the entirety of 1.22c. Here's a list of all the 1.22 patches we've had so far:Quote:
Originally Posted by Colino
- D2012.04.23.0001.patch (1.22) - 276 MB
- D2012.05.08.0000.patch (1.22a) - 26 MB
- D2012.05.15.0000.patch (1.22a Hotfix) - 26.1 MB
- D2012.05.22.0000.patch (1.22a Hotfix) - 26.4 MB
- D2012.06.06.0000.patch (1.22b) -123 MB
- D2012.06.19.0000.patch (1.22c) - 127 MB
- D2012.06.26.0000.patch (1.22c Hotfix) - 127.1 MB
-
06-28-2012, 08:07 PMAvraym
TYVM. Clever Lala's :D
-
06-28-2012, 08:10 PMHaibelQuote:
Originally Posted by Chrees
That is interesting Info. I would hope SE would take into account that More and More ISP are Metering Bandwidth.
Not to mention there own bandwidth cost. Streaming 127mb X subs for a 300kb update isn't very cost effective. -
06-28-2012, 08:36 PMChreesYeah, it's definitely not a very good solution, but it is better than it used to be for patches 1.16 and 1.17, which was what Colino described earlier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Haibel
Patch 1.17 was the worst offender, with the base patch being 325 MB and a, b, and c being 327, 328, and 328.1 MB, respectively. The community was pretty up in arms about it too, because they were downloading such big patches just for fairly minor changes like new targeting modes and bug fixes. Anyone who remembers the "LOLPATCH 1.16/1.17" threads knows what I'm talking about, haha.
Thankfully that didn't last long, and they implemented the current system with patch 1.18. -
06-28-2012, 08:47 PMEekiki
Seems to me it wouldn't be so difficult to write a program that scans your program files, sees which ones need updating, and downloads only those files that are necessary.
-
06-28-2012, 11:49 PMHaibelI really don't have many problems with current patch process other then over inflated patches. I'm a believer in networkQuote:
Originally Posted by Eekiki
conservation. anytime you can save bandwidth by not pushing un-needed data through the network is a good thing.
The whole file check/download only needed files while good in theory, is usually a slow process.
This P2P patch also has a flaw. while it is also good in theory. it doesn't seem that there are
enough seeds in the stream and we have to get the patch from the few ppl that have a a seed from
SE. SE's patcher takes way too long and the few times I've run the update on a torrent, on something like this
patch by the time i'm done downloading the patch I've uploaded 1.5 gb's to other peers.
I usually just direct download the patch from a user that is nice enough to post them online.
less headache and I can use my net at work to do it. only draw back is i'm a day behind everybody eles in
getting patched. which I can live with. -
06-29-2012, 06:19 AMviion
The way SE handles updating is so old fashion and out dated, i find it hilarious, its just so badly done.
Heck these days we even have games that can update in the background and you can play with only a portion downloaded (eg, wow, diablo, tera, etc).
GW2 has a nice updator too, it downloads individual files not 1 big file and no silly torrentness. -
06-29-2012, 08:07 AMTokyieRage
I doubt it was just hotfixes, SE likes to sneak in dats, or different content in stuff like this to prepare for the next big patch (1.23)
-
06-29-2012, 08:42 AMGriss
Hold on to your hats kids, I'm about to blow your minds.
The reason for the repeating patch sizes? its.. and your going to get a kick out of this. The current architecture of the client seems to require things to be replaced instead of allowing files to be modified. New emote? the whole damned list has to be replaced. Minor tweek to the crafting system? The whole shebang has to be replaced.
Rumored outsourced coding strikes again! -
06-29-2012, 09:48 AMSoukyuuThey were doing incremential patches until somewhere around 1.20 where they started to just dump the whole patch + delta into a new download.Quote:
Originally Posted by Haibel
-
06-29-2012, 09:59 AMNakiamiieYou should try to switch ISP and/or complain to the ISP about their metering policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Haibel
Also, it is something that is definitely worth bringing on the political scene. Internet should be promoted, not restricted.
All you need to do is a simple phone or mail an handwritten letter.
If you don't do it, no rights to complain.