PC latest experimental

NiteVIper

NiteVIper

Active member
I selected latest experimental on steam to check out what the game is going to be about, how do I know if I'm participating in it? When selected, do I need to start a new game as well? Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this. Usually play this game on my PS5.

 
NiteVIper said:
I selected latest experimental on steam to check out what the game is going to be about, how do I know if I'm participating in it? When selected, do I need to start a new game as well? Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask this. Usually play this game on my PS5.
Click to expand...


There is not currently an experimental version available. Selecting that is the same as the current Stable build right now.

When PC Experimental releases, you will see an announcement for it. You will also notice the build inside the client is different.

 
Just to add to this, when set to latest experimental, it will automatically download and install the experimental version when it becomes available.  It is usually not recommended to continue an old game in experimental, though it can often work okay.  You should at least make a backup if you care about the save.  Also, most mods that aren't XML mods, and sometimes even some of those, will not work with experimental until they are updated.  And many mod authors won't release updates during experimental.

 
@Riamus That would be the first time that you don´t need a new save when a new version comes out. This might have worked from like A20.2 to A20.3. It´s for sure not working with V1.3 to V2.0 looking at the changes.

 
pApA^LeGBa said:
@Riamus That would be the first time that you don´t need a new save when a new version comes out. This might have worked from like A20.2 to A20.3. It´s for sure not working with V1.3 to V2.0 looking at the changes.
Click to expand...
It varies.  I've used A21 in 1.0 before.  But they have said they want to try to keep updates from breaking saves now.  Whether that happens is unknown.  That is why I suggested a backup.  And some problems aren't significant and can be ignored, so it also depends what people think about any problems they may have.

A lot of the changes shouldn't really break saves.  Biome hazards shouldn't, though the kit slot might.  New zombies shouldn't, nor should new tiers of zombies. 

Either way, if you make a backup, there is no reason you can't try an old save.

 
pApA^LeGBa said:
I doubt it tbh, adding biome effects to a existing map is what i think won´t work. But we will see.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that would be a problem?  I don't see why the hazards would be saved in your save game for any reason.  It would just be tied to the biome, likely as an XML setup similar to other biome effects.  The only biome thing I've noticed that gets messed up in a save is when you change a biome map mid-game.  And that's mainly because your save includes all the biome decorations (trees/etc.) and where they are located, but then the map has a different biome, which leads to the wrong decorations in each biome.

But we'll see.  There will be a lot of new things that could impact saves and we won't know until we have experimental and can try.

 
Mostly because the map is a seperate file and that changes to the maps and their generation was one of the main reaons that we needed new save files.

 
pApA^LeGBa said:
Mostly because the map is a seperate file and that changes to the maps and their generation was one of the main reaons that we needed new save files.
Click to expand...
But biome hazards aren't technically tied to the map.  They are tied to biomes, and although the biome map is part of the map, the hazards wouldn't be saved as part of the map the way other things are.  Now, if you changed the biome map after starting a save and then reloaded chunks or regions (or even reset a POI for a quest) so it loaded those changes into the map, then I could see a possible problem.  But if the biome map doesn't change, then it should just apply the effect to the biomes where they are and not change anything about the map.  Of course, this is speculation based on doing a lot of work with maps and it might be incorrect, but that's one thing I really don't think would break a save.  Other things could, though.

Here's an example... if you load in a mod that adds new biome decorations to an existing save, you can continue to play your save.  At most, you might get some decorations that appear in odd places like on roads, but the save itself would be fine.  And biome decorations are actually saved as part of a save, so would have more impact on a save than the hazards should.  Of course, removing biome decorations that are in a save has the potential to break a save.

 
Riamus said:
But biome hazards aren't technically tied to the map.  They are tied to biomes, and although the biome map is part of the map, the hazards wouldn't be saved as part of the map the way other things are.  Now, if you changed the biome map after starting a save and then reloaded chunks or regions (or even reset a POI for a quest) so it loaded those changes into the map, then I could see a possible problem.  But if the biome map doesn't change, then it should just apply the effect to the biomes where they are and not change anything about the map.  Of course, this is speculation based on doing a lot of work with maps and it might be incorrect, but that's one thing I really don't think would break a save.  Other things could, though.

Here's an example... if you load in a mod that adds new biome decorations to an existing save, you can continue to play your save.  At most, you might get some decorations that appear in odd places like on roads, but the save itself would be fine.  And biome decorations are actually saved as part of a save, so would have more impact on a save than the hazards should.  Of course, removing biome decorations that are in a save has the potential to break a save.
Click to expand...


There is more to the changes for biome progression than just a buff added to the biome.

The main reasons why starting a new save is required with major updates.

  • Blocks added/removed changes the block ID table.
  • Entities added/removed changes the entity ID table.
  • The engine loading a world created with the old ID's, but having reference to the new ID's causes corruption in the save.
  • Changes to player progression invalidate the character data, and require the character to be reset.
  • Changes to core game mechanics in the engine.



So basically, in order for TFP to pull off the ability to play 1.3 on 2.0 they will need the client to have two sets of data configs. One for 1.3 that would be loaded when a 1.3 save is detected, and the base config for 2.0.

Theoretically, they have made steps in the modding platform with 1.0 to allow for that. Given their history though, I don't have high hopes of them fully pulling that off yet.

 
@FranticDan I forgot about that change. That most likely won´t work.

I have seen changes to a lot of things in one update without ever having to start over in Valheim. The only two times where you maybe had to start a new save was when the 2 new biomes were added. But only if you already visited those biomes before they were added. (They already "existed" before they were added but were empty wasteland)

So there still is a small chance as they now try to avoid having to start over.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, I forgot about the perk changes. Those will likely corrupt player data. For player data issues, they could just automatically reset a player (perhaps with an "are you sure?" sanity check) to avoid that problem.  That would leave only world save stuff that could corrupt the save 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FranticDan said:
its the changing around of perks that will break saves, plus the challenge system doesn't like being changes at all in the middle of a save. No idea how console saves will be compatible since that is mandatory for TFP to achieve
Click to expand...
Simply done. They just need to allow players to remain on their current version or manually choose to update to the new version requiring a restart. As long as saves aren’t broken by an automatic download and players have the option to continue their current saves, Microsoft and Sony will be fine with it.  
 

Splitting the player base into old version and new version isn’t as damaging for a game like this where most servers are small private groups of friends who decide together whether to remain or move on. Large servers of random players are the exception and not the rule and nonexistent in console anyway. There are no large scale official servers so players will just continue to play with friends and families or find their own people to form up with on either a new version or old version server. 
 

It would mean that the fully functioning crossplay feature should probably be pushed out as a 1.4 update so that console players can choose to play on dedicated servers without having to update to 2.0 and have to start over. That would not be nice to package dedicated servers with having to start over. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Roland said:
That would not be nice to package dedicated servers with having to start over. 
Click to expand...
But but; with the "1.4" patch they'd have to join an "old" dedicated server as a new player, they wouldn't be playing an old save otherwise - but they wouldn't really care of unknown ongoing saves, as they haven't been on them...? Or am I missing something?

 
Well there could be some groups where the current host would be able to setup their own dedicated server with another PC and keep the current save going but with the added convenience that a dedicated offers. 
 

people just surfing for a server to join would want to update for sure. But even they may have a solo game they want to continue at the same time that they play with an online group. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top