Today's patch, digital soundtracks, a turbo test league and resistance penalties

"
Rhalph wrote:
"
Chris wrote:
By the way... it's very likely that tomorrow we'll have fixed the graphical glitches and associated crashes!!!

Okay, too much awesomeness, I'm going to pass out.


Not sure if the fix will work...


...or not.
✠ ✠
Wtb track order for the soundtrack.
Sounds exciting, What about the lag>?
Will we be able to make new choices on the bandits quest reward when the resistance penalties come?
"
Malice wrote:
"
Chris wrote:
Many players will be pleased to hear that we've found and fixed the bug that sometimes prevented Totems from attacking nearby monsters. This will be included in the next patch.

What was the bug? I'm so curious


This one was really subtle.

There was a small struct that contained a pointer to one of it's own members inside it. If it was to be copied, then the copy would have a pointer pointing in to the old object which is bad. However, there wasn't any reason to copy the struct.

A copy of this was instanced as a temporary and accidentally passed by value instead of by reference to another function. In windows and in linux without optimisations, it worked. In linux with optimisations enabled the buggy behaviour surfaced and would cause the target searcher to think it had already found a valid target (and thus would terminate before finding a real one).
Path of Exile II - Game Director
"
Jonathan wrote:
In windows and in linux without optimisations, it worked. In linux with optimisations enabled the buggy behaviour surfaced and would cause the target searcher to think it had already found a valid target (and thus would terminate before finding a real one).

By "in Linux" do you mean running the game in Wine? 'Just wondering.
same name in-game
"
Jonathan wrote:
Spoiler
"
Malice wrote:
"
Chris wrote:
Many players will be pleased to hear that we've found and fixed the bug that sometimes prevented Totems from attacking nearby monsters. This will be included in the next patch.

What was the bug? I'm so curious


This one was really subtle.

There was a small struct that contained a pointer to one of it's own members inside it. If it was to be copied, then the copy would have a pointer pointing in to the old object which is bad. However, there wasn't any reason to copy the struct.

A copy of this was instanced as a temporary and accidentally passed by value instead of by reference to another function. In windows and in linux without optimisations, it worked. In linux with optimisations enabled the buggy behaviour surfaced and would cause the target searcher to think it had already found a valid target (and thus would terminate before finding a real one).


Johnathan does this also affect the reduced range that the totems now have?
I'm BACK :)
Hei did Somebody have a Beta key for me????
Today I am going to upgrade my account and download the soundtrack. It is going to be great to listen while playing the path o.... Wait what?

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info