Last I heard, an update with fixes to all the issues / lost features that 3.0 and 3.1 caused was close to being released. What’s the latest on this? How soon can we expect to see this? In the 30 days? Summer?
Bump
Can someone at UT at least say if the next update is in beta yet or not? Or when they anticipate it going into beta? I just need a rough idea for planning a couple future projects.
They are at 3.2.0b2, at least as far as the beta I received to do a compile for the OS X app store. It was strictly for that compile as the web player had a Unity Beta in the bottom right corner that did not show up when compiling to OSX desktop. But yes, they are at least two iterations into 3.2
HTH
BTH
Encouraging news, thanks.
Man, I hope they get it out soon, not being able to import video is cramping my style.
I just hope they get it -right- this time. If it takes a bit longer, then so be it.
Of course.
While I have refrained from venting too much on v3, I’ve got to say, a serious bug-fix release would be most welcome!! My windows editor locks up more than half the time whenever it encounters an error, and I find I’m doing more “work arounds” on both Mac and Win than I’d care to admit.
I’m a little discouraged the next release in the pipe is a full point release (typically Unity reserves those for significant feature updates). I’d rather see a 3.1.5 that works. Now, if they want to hand out some goodies along with bug-fix, more power to them… but please don’t overlook the bugs… please?
Cheers,
Galen
It would simply help if they would develop some sense for quality and responsibility for a change.
It’s a miracle to me how the releases so far could pass Beta and QA unless people in there aren’t more the happy shiny people folks.
Well, that’s not necessarily true. Could be any combination of Use cases the beta testers try and their technical depth/needs. If they follow the instructions for a new tech, like Beast, with guidance from Unity when they fall off the path, then there’s no reason they’d encounter the problems you might see “out in the wild”.
That and… what are the “beta testers” trying to do? This isn’t game beta testing… this is dev/middleware testing. There are almost as many potential use cases as there are ideas.
Cheers,
Galen
It is just too easy to find bugs in V3. Instead of showing up in more complex scenarios they already show up in simple use cases and that’s something you can expect getting tested and fixed by a company on its own, and also getting named by Beta testers who use the software as well, upfront, before release.
My thoughts would have been that the release was rushed do to its delay but as certain posts from Unity indicated, they also thought that the release was good enough and that’s were in my opinion pretence and reality differs. I don’t know where in the pipeline something went wrong but the result speaks for itself.
Ok, I’ll give you, editor locking on a simple null pointer error is pretty easy to find… (my use case 
).
In any case, I sincerely hope this next release comes packed with “we fixed it” goodness 
Cheers,
Galen
Me too! :O)
Check the docs, there is some funny faq page in the manual which hotlinks the required Win 64bit hotfix to help in this case. (not that it wouldn’t be easier if the game mode would not run in the editor, then we could reasonably debug it, current debugging is useless as half the issues don’t show up till build)
That won’t help, I’m running 32bit windows xp.
sigh
Of course, I’d wager most of my potential customers are also running 32bit, so resolving my editor problem won’t help if the runtime chokes after build.
Cheers,
Galen
Really, the release version numbers are just numbers; people need to stop reading so much into them. What actually matters is what’s in the release notes.
–Eric
This is a good point. I mean, why is it Firefox 3.6.13? why not 3.7? or 3.9 by now. They are almost ready for version 4. Really version numbers are just arbitrary numbers for any piece of software.
True, numbers are only numbers, but… in years past the version number never got much past x.5 or x.6.
Exactly, what do those numbers mean when only reaching X.5 or X.6? It’s all arbitrary. Shouldn’t it have reached X.9 before getting to the next version? What’s wrong with getting past X.5 or X.6? Because it has happened before, this is considered the standard? That’s interesting, yet understandable I suppose.
Eric’s right, the numbers are totally irrelevant. I’m just a bit anxious because of how big a disappointment 3.x has been for me so far and I’m hoping that will change with the next release. I’m taking a chance though and have started a new project with 3.1 in the hopes that the next release will be the “Holy Grail”. If it ends up not to be the case, I’ll just have to drag everything back into 2.6.1 (something I very much hope not to have to do).