Thread: It's 1.20 not 1.2

Originally Posted by normalforce

Actually, it would go 1.99, 1.100, 1.101, etc.

I'm referring to a decimal system.
in decimal, you could stretch it out by going from 1.99 to 1.991, if i did 1.99 to 1.100, that would be a lower number of 1.1 (or 1.10)

Originally Posted by Vawn

Well isn't this a stupid thing to argue about.

Originally Posted by Nahaara

Isn't this a silly thing to argue about? >.>

If you want I can create another thread about "OMG THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO CHARGE" or "I HAVE THIS GREAT IDEA". Your choice ;D

Originally Posted by Kaizlu

If you want I can create another thread about "OMG THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO CHARGE" or "I HAVE THIS GREAT IDEA". Your choice ;D

I had to +1 this.

I posted this in another thread but technically we don't know what system they're using. Some people do in fact use versions as strict rational numbers, while others just use the dot as a separator.

Since the first numbered patch was 1.15a, we have no way of knowing which they are using (although the "0" would suggest non-decimal), and won't for sure until we get patches after 2.0.

Damn, I think I've suddenly stepped into 4chan. You guys argue about everything.

Its obvious that they are proper decimals which is why it has been 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.9, 1.20, 1.21 etc etc, some people do refer to them and 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 and 1.9, but if they followed that logic, we would be on v2 now.

1.20=1.2, 1.12 (although it didnt exsist) =/= 1.2 its not rocket science.