RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815



Message

BruceSinger -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/23/2008 2:52:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Hey guys:

I sincerely apologize for the frustrations! I can tell you that I will not stop improving this game and will ALWAYS listen to you what you have to say! I value your opinions and hate it when you're frustrated. You're my customer and want only for you to be satisfied! I will not stop until you are satisfied!

PLEASE don't give up yet!




First - Thank you for the game!

I am currently playing a 1.02i game as Turkey and have made it though the first year. A lot of the Ottoman Empire bugs have been fixed. Good Job.






Marshall Ellis -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/23/2008 3:28:59 AM)

Keep playing BruceSinger!
Appreciate the encouragement!



alvaradotx -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/25/2008 6:03:00 PM)

my experience is just as bad. bought WAW and then they UPGRADE with WAW a World Divided that you have to pay for...Bought Forge of Freedom and quit trying to play and wasting all that time in a beta sold as final product.
will wait to invest in any other products until they have been out at least a year . I read the forums to stay in touch with products I am interested in and see what progress is being made.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/25/2008 10:59:47 PM)

I cannot argue, Alvarado. Keep looking because it's getting better. Perfect? Nope. Some people love the rush of being close to the tornado and some don't. That not a judgement call for right or wrong, just a fact! You ought be able to relate because if you're from Alvarado then you guys got hit pretty hard just the other night, right?

These games are tough to play on the board and VERY tough to port to the PC!




YohanTM2 -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/26/2008 3:23:16 PM)

There are more buyers out there as well. My brother has the game and is acting as our beta. As soon as he says it is really playable by PBEM at least 2 more of us will buy.



Erik Rutins -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/26/2008 3:58:01 PM)

Alvaradotx,

quote:

ORIGINAL: alvaradotx
my experience is just as bad. bought WAW and then they UPGRADE with WAW a World Divided that you have to pay for...


Excuse me, but there was a two year gap between those products and WAW received multiple free upgrades. It was perfectly playable from the first release and the upgrades improved it significantly. The AWD improvements were absolutely "new release level" and you're the first person I've heard say that WAW was a bad experience.

quote:

Bought Forge of Freedom and quit trying to play and wasting all that time in a beta sold as final product.


Again, this release had one critical bug on release, which was fixed within a week. The developers then spent a year improving it further with free upgrades that had additional scenarios and new features. It's an outstanding game. I've played through several full PBEMs of it and it is absolutely not a beta and was not at initial release either.

While I respect each customer's opinion, I really have to wonder when the above games are used as an example of what's wrong, when the vast majority of our customers point to them as "what's right".

If anything, you can look at these two previous releases and see how much effort we put into improving them even when they were fine at releae, then see what we expect to do for EIA, which had more problems. EIA will be "fixed", it just may take some time to get it to the point we all want it to be.

Regards,

- Erik



Dave_T -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/28/2008 11:57:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

I cannot argue, Alvarado. Keep looking because it's getting better. Perfect? Nope. Some people love the rush of being close to the tornado and some don't. That not a judgement call for right or wrong, just a fact! You ought be able to relate because if you're from Alvarado then you guys got hit pretty hard just the other night, right?

These games are tough to play on the board and VERY tough to port to the PC!


Getting better? You're having a giraffe. Each "patch" introduces new bugs.

This is without doubt the worst game I've paid money for in 20 years and calling it EiA with player made rules is a joke condisering the number of core rules excluded due to them being a tad difficult to code.

If this were a car it would have had a product recall. Car manufacturers have morals. And answer emails.



NeverMan -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/29/2008 3:21:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave_T

Car manufacturers have morals. And answer emails.



Now I know you are off your rocker.

This is a VERY close adaptation to EiANW, VERY close. The major problem is that somewhere along the lines EiH got introduced. EiH sucks IMO. Maybe Matrix would have been better off calling this game Empires in Harms. Would you have liked that better?

Other than venting what is the point of posting on here every other day about how you don't like the game? There are plenty of people playing this game right now that are enjoying it very much, I'm sorry you are not one of them.

I'm just curious, have you played a PBEM game yet?



pzgndr -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/29/2008 4:43:38 AM)

quote:

Other than venting what is the point of posting on here every other day about how you don't like the game?


Yeah, ditto. Marshall is aware of the whining. Erik is aware of the whining. We are all aware of the whining and complaining, ad nauseum. It's not helping anything at this point. Geez. [8|] Matrix has resolved to get things fixed. We need to be patient a little while longer. I'm like a venture capitalist here, viewing my time spent on continuing EiA development as an investment. I'm not complaining. I do wish the fixes would come a little bit faster, but we all wish for lots of things. No biggie. It's just a game.

quote:

The major problem is that somewhere along the lines EiH got introduced. EiH sucks IMO.


Being new to the game, it seems playable enough for me. I am still very interested in the editor and eventually seeing original EiA OOBs and a more updated EiH v4 or v5 OOB, which some say is better than the EiH v3 OOB currently implemented. I'd like to decide for myself which version I prefer. I don't see why players can't eventually have multiple OOBs for the various scenarios and campaigns. Be flexible. Marshall can help by providing more options. Like both AI and UMP options for non-players. Again, we need to be patient a little while longer. [:)]



Dave_T -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/29/2008 2:57:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeverMan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Dave_T

Car manufacturers have morals. And answer emails.



Now I know you are off your rocker.

This is a VERY close adaptation to EiANW, VERY close. The major problem is that somewhere along the lines EiH got introduced. EiH sucks IMO. Maybe Matrix would have been better off calling this game Empires in Harms. Would you have liked that better?


Very close, excluding 4 corps per depot, combined movement, naval evasion, naval pursuit, leader casualties, ability to choose your own casualties on port evacuation, inability to add secondary districts to minors on later conquest, inability to add more provinces to kingdoms after creation, most of kingdoms missed off, retirement into city,. They're the major ones that affect gameplay

Yes. I wouldn't have considered buying it if it were marketed as EiH. It's marketed as EiA with player rule changes, not EiH with bits missed of that were too hard to code.

quote:


Other than venting what is the point of posting on here every other day about how you don't like the game? There are plenty of people playing this game right now that are enjoying it very much, I'm sorry you are not one of them.


Trying to get a response from Matrix who have ignored my emails and only respond to forums. I'm sorry I'm not one of them too. This game has promise but doesn't live up to it's advertising and doesn't work the way it's supposed to

quote:


I'm just curious, have you played a PBEM game yet?


Yes. Been playing PBeM for 10 years and the board game for 15. Didn't want this for PBeM but solo. The AI is currently bad, I can actually live with the bad interface & poor AI as the interface is only superficial and AIs can be improved but instances where, for example, movement to an adjacent area is "too difficult" or you end up fighting yourself in a port blockade box, make the game unplayable at a certain point and, therefore, not fit for purpose.

Personally I put this down to bad testing. The testers were people who wanted the game released regardless of problems where people who may want to buy it want a working product, not a product you have to devise "work arounds"

Very few people on the EiA list seem to have taken this up, I've seen no game postings asking for a PBeM using this, on the EiH list it's the same.

If I want to play EiA by email I'll continue to use cyberboard, notepad & excel.



NeverMan -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/29/2008 6:18:33 PM)

Dave,

I understand your frustration.

Personally, I have used Cyberboard/Notepad and so far, I prefer using EiANW for PBEM games. When I asked if you had played a PBEM game I was refering to a PBEM game with EiANW.

I don't think your "testers wanted this game out" logic applies since the testers already had access to the game. Not sure what their motivaiton would be other than to get a copy of the game which they already had access to.

The rules you list are important, but if you take a step back and look at the overall game, there are a SUPER TON (that's a lot of TON btw) rules and you mentioned just a few. With time I have no doubt this game will be purely KICK ASS!!! I think you will end up being happy.

EDIT: Don't get me started on car companies, the biggest theives and liars in modern industry. If you are tired of giving crappy 3rd world countries (Iraq, Venezuala) run by dictators who hate the free world your money because cars depend on oil, which they don't have to, you should first look at the Automobile Industry. This industry buys up technology just to "shelf" it because converting to newer technologies is not very cost effective in the short term. They would rather drag the process out.



Marshall Ellis -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/29/2008 7:57:00 PM)

Dave_T:

I'm sorry! Have you been trying to email me? I'm not getting eny emails from you so I apologize if I'm not answering! Are you sending to marshalle@matrixgames.com?

You are right that when we introduce 20 fixes that we also introduce 5 new problems. This is the way our world works. Eventually, if you do the math, we do get there.




Jimmer -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 12:20:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis
You are right that when we introduce 20 fixes that we also introduce 5 new problems. This is the way our world works. Eventually, if you do the math, we do get there.



There's a principle in computing called "The Conway Principle", named after some think-tank guy who first put it to paper. Essentially, the principle is that the more bugs you find in software, the more there are remaining to go.

The principle is false, but only partly. It's false because the NUMBER isn't mentioned, but it is implied to be getting larger. However, in programming, the rate of bug reports always goes down after an initial spike (for the statisticians out there, it follows a chi-squared distribution).

But, GAME programming introduces another element that makes the whole equation go bonkers: Games only sell well for a short period of time after they are released.

So, games must fix all these bugs early in release, or they lose market share (read: put their heads into a noose).

I think, though, that Matrix correctly has guaged the market for EiA: Quite a bit more likely to stick it out. Yes, there are bugs, and there WILL be bugs (and lots of them). But, they will be fixed.

IMO, you guys have done a stellar job of fixing problems as they show up. Even having dozens of hard-core gamers digging into numerous nooks and crannies of your game, you have still managed to put a legitimately playable game into the field. I applaud you for this.

(Now, if I could only get an answer to my "How about a multi-user license?" question, ....)



Dave_T -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 1:07:46 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Dave_T:

I'm sorry! Have you been trying to email me? I'm not getting eny emails from you so I apologize if I'm not answering! Are you sending to marshalle@matrixgames.com?

You are right that when we introduce 20 fixes that we also introduce 5 new problems. This is the way our world works. Eventually, if you do the math, we do get there.




I emailed support@matrix, which was ignored.

The bugs introduced actually make the game worse than before. I thought I'd give it one more go with 1.02j, but having Russia sail straight through a Swedish blockade in order to drop troops into Sweden is pretty bad.

The game, from the outset, has a problem with major powers recognising the correct status of supported minors.

1.00 had the following problem: Tu DoW Egypt, Fr takes control. Tu move 1 corps into Egypt & stays there. Eventually Fr drops corps off in Egypt (Fr Free State), but once there they can't move to an adjacent area as it's "too complicated".

1.01 had the following: Rs DoW Sweden, Fr takes control. GB fails to recognise Swedish fleets as enemies & allows Sw flets to sail with impunity. Sw drops off 1 Corps Dublin & 1 Corps Glasgow, in the next turn these corps cannot move to an adjacent area as it's "too complicated".

1.02i had the following problem: fleets in BB could intercept, further fleets in port who are blockaded can intercept.

1.02j now has the problem that a minor that an MP is at war with doesn't recognise the fleets in BB as being an enemy although Russia did attack the Swedish fleets earlier, either that or blockades don't work, they didn't in 1.02i. Blockades are kind of important.

Each patch is fixing minor bugs and creating major ones. This is not forward movement. It's not even sideways, it's backwards.

I'm resentful that as a paying customer I'm asked to test a product that I've paid for based on claims that it was ready for release.

Matrix say that based on playtesting that they were assured this game was ready for release, it obviously isn't and wont be for several months.

Fair play to the people who want to help develop it and are willing to look on this as a long term investment with a payoff months down the line, I can't afford to do that and people who expected to buy a finished product shouldn't either. Matrix refuse to bite the bullet and admit their mistake and further insult people by failing to reply to emails.

I never expected much from the AI, human players have a hard time copeing with some of the decision making needed and AIs can't do intuitive gameplay. The interface is clunky, so what? If the game engine underneath works then the inteface is superficial.

I do hope this game eventally meets it's billing, but currently it's getting a bad rep on both the EiA and EiH Y! groups. Younger players aren't going to want to play via Cyberboard & WarfareProject, yet the old timers won't play something that diminishes the basic gameplay.

It would put an end to the annual "at what point in the sequence does a corps retire into a city" argument/fight/flame war.



jjax -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 6:48:25 AM)

Hey Dave_T

When I was a young lad, I would always spend my monthly allowance on a new Nintendo game. Back then, the only thing that could tell you whether the game was any good or not was the cover art. More often then not, the cover art was misleading. That’s when I felt absolutely ripped off.

Now that we have forums and online game sites to give us instant feed back on the quality of a game, it is almost impossible for a company like Matrix games to misrepresent their product to those that are willing to do some research before purchase.

Now, there have been a couple of bad games that I have purchased despite negative opinion(including some matrix games). And despite my anger, I choose to eat the cost. I think you should do the same (why??? see above).

If matrix gives you your money back, it’s very nice of them. But I would disagree with their decision.

On the bright side, I do think EiA will be improved. And when it is im sure it will cost you only the time of the download.



Kwik E Mart -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 8:09:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: borner

Is anyone else out there about fed up withthe gabe bugs??? Seriously, I know there was a lot of presure to get this game released, but if it was not ready, it should have been held back. In one game, French garrisons disappear,and the minors go netrual, in another, Russian corps disappear, in another, Turkey declares on Austria, but then in the land phase, no war exists, in another, GB's fleets cannot sail to break a blockade. I feel so cheated having spent full price on a game that is not playable. If someone from Matrix is reading this, can you please give us an update on when a playable verison of this game will be released, and can those of us that bought the first verison get an updated CD with a workable game???? IO am sorry for being so upset, but it's very fustrating to put in the time every evening with 6 other players, and have things like this happen.


i'm sorry to say, that in addition to the two game that borner references above (which i am part of), i'm in a third game with similar issues...i'm GB controlling Egypt and Cyrenecia against the Turks (but not at war with them)...i fully garison the capitol cities...from the game log, i don't see any messages that the Turks broke into the cities...great, i think, i can do some damage while the garisons hold out...the very next turn, the garisons dissapear and the Turks get control....WTF?

i'm dissapointed...i have purchased almost a dozen matrix games with varying satisfaction...but this one is tough to swallow...i totally understand the complexity of these games...but, i'm too busy to continue to try and "muscle f*ck" this game...i haven't sent any saved games to matrix...why should i have to do that?...i barely have enough time to play the PBEM games i'm in...ok, maybe i bit off more than i can chew playing 3 games...but, com'on...that really shouldn't be an issue either...i guess i'm giving up...

*sigh*

this is such a great game...i've enjoyed every turn that hasn't gone wrong due to a bug (or whatever) immensely...i just can't justify spending anymore time on it...i'm spending double, sometimes triple the emails to resolve issues due to this seemingly buggy game...and i have to say, without being even close to being an expert on this stuff, the patches are causing more harm than good...maybe the patches are good, but not everyone is on the same patch...egad...my head is spinning again just thinking about it...i shouldn't have to have my head spin to enjoy a game...

i wish the staff and everyone playing this great game the best of success getting this thing ready for "prime time"...i just can't spend this amount of time trying to make a broke car run...



StCyr -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 1:39:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marshall Ellis

Hey guys:

I sincerely apologize for the frustrations! I can tell you that I will not stop improving this game and will ALWAYS listen to you what you have to say! I value your opinions and hate it when you're frustrated. You're my customer and want only for you to be satisfied! I will not stop until you are satisfied!

PLEASE don't give up yet!





LOL [:D]

Dear Marshall, do you really want me to search the forum for your reaction to complains about the map design of EiA, just in the beginng ? That you don´t want to discuss this topic at all, and no changes would be made ? That was your attitude in the beginning - but well, at that point you did not lie.

You only need to start a game i.e. with Turkey, do nothing and watch the "AI" work - within 6 month all other major powers will be at war with your nation. On the other side, play any nation you want and you can win every game without any problem. Simply because there is no AI in this game!
And now you apologize for the frustrations ?? Please, dont tell anybody that our frustraton was a surprise for you.



timewalker03 -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (4/30/2008 6:19:08 PM)

Welcome all to 21st Century Consumerism. This is where the Customer is only partially right. Well only right if they agree with the company and wrong at every other occasion. It blows me away every time I see Eric or David make the comment that all parties involved were happy with the game at release and saw it as a viable product to unleash to a rabid community. I think that they were definitely wrong in their assessment yet the game continues to be sold as if it were a viable product even now. This game has become more about economics and a great sign of the times that the consumer doesn't matter much.

Yes Matrix is supporting this game as we speak. They are pumping out patches as fast as they can even though they are incomplete or piecemeal versions of a whole patch. I also realize that many on this community of forums back Matrix 100% and do much to show their support for the company. They do this for a future promise of a great game. Months or years down the road. It has the potential of being this great game, but not because of time and effort of Matrix, but because of the people who want a great game. Those Rabid fans who lust for the days of glory of the old board game. Many make concessions to the differences in the original game and this product.

All of these people who continually give Marshall feedback and report bugs do this for free which is more money in the Matrix pocket since they don't have to really lift a finger to find the bugs. Or better yet Matrix does not have to spend the time finding the bugs, only fix them. This is what todays consumer must deal with. Companies release flawed products all of the time and consumers must then deal with the recalls and time wasted dealing with getting fixes or money back. Whether Matrix believed this product was good to go or not is no longer an issue. The facts speak for themselves. It was not ready by any means but that is now completely irrelevant.

What scares me in a figurative way is that once the major bugs and AI fixes are complete and we see V1.70 or something above 1.1 we will then be told Matrix is now working on Scenarios and enhanced features. This will be EiANW 2.0 and will then cost us consumers more money to get the product we should have had when the game was originally released. Always remember this. As a consumer you have no rights even if a company spells out what it will do in writing. That written word is only worth the paper it is written on. $70 should be buying us enjoyment and it seems it has bought many frustration and stress (except for the lemmings towing the company line) in a time where money stretches less and less for the average person.

One final thing for those who may ask what experience I have playing the game. I spent the $70 about 2 weeks after the game came out. I am currently in 2 PBEM games. Both have been hit with bugs. One game has actually been hit twice and may be restarting for the 2nd time. The other game was referenced by KwikEMart. I am the Turkish player in that game and watched also in horror as his Garrisons disappeared and I claimed the territories even after I got error messages when I tried to siege the cities and gave up and just ended my turn in frustration. Next thing I know I have two conquered minors without any losses. To that I don't know what to say. Do I think it was a good investment in both money and time. NO. Could it be. MAYBE. I just know that I took a risk and lost and Matrix like most companies is the only one truly winning because of this game. With that good luck!



Ingtar -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/1/2008 2:32:58 AM)

I wrote off this title as having wasted my cash on it long ago.  I never could get past the resolution problems, the bugs, and the interface.  I think this made three or four titles in a row from Matrix that turned out to be bombs - for me.  This is coming after a string of good games, so I'm not ready to give up on them yet, simply the game.



tevans6220 -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/1/2008 9:11:42 AM)

Since we're all sharing, I thought I may as well throw my two cents in. I bought this game on release day and only played it for a week before determining that it was just too buggy to keep playing. Sadly I now keep waiting for that "magical patch" that turns this game into what I thought I was buying. Sorry Matrix but I'm not interested in being a beta tester or sending in saves with bugs. Testing and putting out a decent product is your job. The way I look at it, I should have just flushed $70 down the toilet for all the gameplay I've gotten out of this game. I've been a huge Matrix fan over the years, owning over three dozen Matrix titles. The one thing I've noticed is that a large majority of those titles are continuous works in progress. That gets tiresome after awhile. It's true that Matrix stands behind their products but they might not have to do so much standing if the product was initially put out in decent shape. Naturally when you're charging $69.99 for a product it's easy to say that it was ready for release. There's a financial reason for saying so. This game was absolutely not ready for release and it still shows. Sadly after almost five months since release it still has problems. When is this game finally going to be fixed and playable? Sorry Matrix but I kinda feel cheated on this one.



Erik Rutins -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/1/2008 4:53:25 PM)

Guys, we agree (in hindsight) that EIA needed some more time in the development and testing oven. As hard as this may be to believe, this was not obvious to us before release. Part of that was due to EIA having a slghtly different development and testing process than our other titles due to its lengthy time in development. We have already made some changes to make sure that doesn't happen again.

In the meantime, we hear you, we know some customers are unhappy and we're working hard to get the reported issues resolved. Despite the issues a lot of customers are also having fun and we hope to greatly increase that pool as time goes on.

I do not feel that we have had any other releases in the last year with the same level of issues as EIA, but if you have some other complaints please feel free to PM me or e-mail me at erikr@matrixgames.com and I'll look into them.

We love to improve our games post-release, but we wholeheartedly agree that they should not _require_ post-release fixes and we try to get as close to that as humanly possible.

Regards,

- Erik



Dave_T -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/1/2008 11:47:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: timewalker03

Welcome all to 21st Century Consumerism. This is where the Customer is only partially right. Well only right if they agree with the company and wrong at every other occasion. It blows me away every time I see Eric or David make the comment that all parties involved were happy with the game at release and saw it as a viable product to unleash to a rabid community. I think that they were definitely wrong in their assessment yet the game continues to be sold as if it were a viable product even now. This game has become more about economics and a great sign of the times that the consumer doesn't matter much.


Further to that I've just been PMed on the forums that "all transactions are final", no refunds will be offered.

So even if the product doesn't actually work, then tough. Matrix will take your money even if what they've sold you is duff.



borner -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 3:28:26 AM)

I am not saying half the people that bought it would want a refund, but I bet the number is at least 10%. My main concerin is going forward, 20 patches fro nowq, if I ever have to load my first edition CD on to a new system, will it truley be workable just loading the most recent patch at that time given everything that has been changed?



JanSorensen -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 8:57:00 AM)

I have no intention at all of asking for a refund but I certainly would find Matrixgames to be more credible if they owned up to the mistake here and offered refunds to those that ask for it. Working on fixing the bugs does go along way towards being credible but 5 months after release it fails to be enough in itself.

Erik, it would be good to have an official answer. Will you be giving refunds to those asking for it considering that you just admitted that the product isnt finished several months after release?




Monadman -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 4:07:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Guys, we agree (in hindsight) that EIA needed some more time in the development and testing oven. As hard as this may be to believe, this was not obvious to us before release.


Erik,

The second sentence is disingenuous and as you refuse to recant after privately requesting that you do so, I feel compelled to respond, not wanting to be party to any back-peddling attempt to save face at someone else’s expense. It was made clear to the public in August 07 and then to David Heath in September 07 that bug containment had not been achieved. In the latter case, I quote myself in an email sent to David Monday, September 03, 2007 7:40 PM:

Bottom line:
If the outstanding bugs cannot be contained within your established timeframe (your call but keep it short) then punt (sorry boss) – game over, but if they do subside within that specific timeframe then support what we have done and go gold.

Although not “critical”, these bugs were not insignificant, and thus warranted the dire recommendation to fold tents if containment could not be had. Was that not obvious enough?

For whatever reasons Matrix had (perhaps to appease the public’s disappointment after five plus years of development and/or faced with losing the rights to EiA), you guys went ahead an released EiANW “as is”.

Richard



Erik Rutins -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 5:17:27 PM)

Richard,

Well, this is disappointing. As Dave and I e-mailed you over the last couple of days, your take on things does not match ours. Instead of discussing that in private, you threatened and then decided to take it public. Posting excerpts from private e-mails in public and out of context is a transparent attempt to further some agenda that is in your interests, but not the game's. It's clear that the only reason you are doing this is that you felt in some way personally slighted by my statement, which in fact was not directed at you at all as I told you in private.

Here's the latest e-mail response I sent you this morning. Since you're taking things public, we may as well follow, at least for a short while.

-----

Richard,

I don't know what other communications you and Dave had, but the one you forwarded, while it raised some serious concerns did not list any specific game-breaking issues. It was also in September, whereas the final decision to release was made at the end of November, _after_ ADG had reviewed it for two weeks and chimed in that they felt it was ready. As I said earlier, I did not have a lot of visibility into this process because of the unusual structure and reporting. When the time came to determine if it would release, as usual that decision was also up to me. After hearing that Marshall and the testers felt it was ready and that ADG had tested it and given a very positive approval (and if the original board game designer thinks it's ready, that's usually a good sign), I thought that any issues would be relatively minor.

I think that perhaps your understanding of how severe some of these issues were exceeded the understanding that Dave or I had. Again, perhaps you communicated that to Dave in specifics but by the time I got involved in the release decision the impression I had was that by the end of November the testing and development team felt that there were no critical issues left. In fact, you may recall that we agreed to an additional delay as requested by Marshall to make sure the final build was as solid as possible.

Here's an exchange from the end of November that you were copied on:

"I am uploading the golden image candidate (eianw-2007-1125-v840-golden_image.zip) to the dev server as we speak.
This version has not been tested as much as I would like and I would like another 24 hours for Richard to put this version through some tests. I realize we're printing soon but would really like the extra day if possible. Let me know, Dave."

My reply:

"Marshall,
You can certainly have the extra day. If need be, we can release EIA next week instead of this week, but we don't want to push it back any farther than that as the manuals are on the way. However, we also want to make sure that the gold build is solid. How many testers have looked over this final build to date? Was anything potentially high risk changed that we should double-check here as well?"

And Marshall's reply:

"There was nothing in particular that was very high risk but we made several changes and this version hasn’t been through systems test yet to make sure that everything plays together well. I could certainly use the extra week if possible. I don’t want to delay but most testers were out for the holidays away from their PCs so they haven’t had much of a chance to review this image. If we could give a release gold image deadline of next Sunday, I would feel better. This release is stable BUT I want it to be tested."

My reply:

"Done, new planned release date for EIA will be Tuesday, December 4th. Please give it as thorough a test as you can in the remaining time. We will not be pushing the release date back again unless a critical issue is found."

Keep in mind, at this point I had been told there were no critical issues left and that the game was stable.

Although you were copied on all of these e-mails, at no point did I receive an objection from you that what was being communicated here was false in any way. In fact, as the lead tester if you had told me "we can't release in this state", I can assure you we would have pushed back the release and investigated further, irrespective of any earlier conversations you had with Dave in September.

Here in fact is a quote from an e-mail I received from Marshall in June, way before September. We kept it in further testing after this e-mail to make sure it was ready.

"Play testing is ongoing and we will continue to do so FOREVER but the testers are comfortable with the stability. I cannot tell you what we’ve might have missed but that’s what updates are for! I cannot see a problem with delivering the Golden Image by the middle of July pending graphic and sounds."

As soon as it was released, the sudden rush of tech support posts made it clear that there were quite a few issues that neither you, Marshall, or we knew existed. Support has been ongoing since then. My reply on the forum was the facts as I knew them and as I still see them. I was not trying to push anything off on anyone, but to make it clear to the customers that I did not know that so many issues would be found after release, period. If you choose to take that personally and forget the pre-release discussions we had, that is obviously your choice but I don't think it is supported by the facts and I know that I would not have signed off on the EIA release had I known then what I know now.

Instead, I would have started yet another new testing cycle with more visibility to us and with a larger pool of testers and some better bug-tracking software, such as we've used on some other complex projects. Dave's concerns about the contract notwithstanding, I would not have allowed it to go out with critical issues such as some of those reported since release had I know they were there.

Regards,

- Erik







Erik Rutins -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 5:22:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JanSorensen
I have no intention at all of asking for a refund but I certainly would find Matrixgames to be more credible if they owned up to the mistake here and offered refunds to those that ask for it. Working on fixing the bugs does go along way towards being credible but 5 months after release it fails to be enough in itself.

Erik, it would be good to have an official answer. Will you be giving refunds to those asking for it considering that you just admitted that the product isnt finished several months after release?


The reason for this policy comes down to digital downloads. Unlike a physical item which you purchase from a store, there is no way for us to "take back" a digital download. Therefore we generally only offer refunds if a product will not work on a system due to technical reasons which cannot be resolved.

With that said, we should take stock of the game's overall state and the community's consensus once the second update (1.02 official) is released. If at that point we haven't been able to resolve enough of the remaining issues to make people happy, then I think it would be reasonable to re-evaluate our policy on this game.

Regards,

- Erik



Jimmer -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 6:05:23 PM)

Well, I want to state for the record that I do NOT want a refund. I have only seen four games in the history of computer games that have been stable, and even then only after a minimum of two patches. One of them was Pong and the other three were from Microsoft. You may choose not ot believe me, but I've seen a LOT of computer games.

All software has bugs. Computer games, which tend to push the envelope of the supporting technology, have more bugs than any other kind of software. Anybody who says otherwise is ignorant or lying, OR possibly they have learned ways AROUND the bugs, and so the bugs don't bother them any more. This last entry is extremely common for gamers.

So, Matrix, keep my money. AND, send me a note about how I can buy a multi-user license upgrade (even if it includes an NDA :)), and I'll buy two more. Possibly even a third extra. I know that I alone can't keep Matrix funded, but I want to add my voice to the group that seems more muted in this discussion: Those who are very satisfied with the overall game (including having these forums).



gwheelock -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/2/2008 6:32:09 PM)

I have to agree with Jimmer here.  I do consider the game playable (vs humans - the AI is
only usable as a "training tool" at the moment - not a challenging opponent).

As evidence; I would like to submit the postings that I have made to the "CleverDevils2 AAR".  In this
game we have gone an ENTIRE GAME YEAR & are still going.  Yes there have been bugs ... some minor...
some moderate ... yes, they are annoying ... NONE have been game-stoppers...

So - guys - keep up the good work & keep the fixes comming.  I am also willing to wait it out.



tevans6220 -> RE: anyone else about read to give up?????? (5/3/2008 2:56:05 AM)

I don't want a refund either. All I want is what I paid for which is a game that is both playable and as bugfree as is humanly possible. The topics in this forum seem to indicate that the goal hasn't been achieved yet. I wouldn't know firsthand because I put the game away one week after purchase due to all of the bugs. I'm not interested in testing beta patches or hunting for bugs. That's not my job. I purchase software for entertainment.

One other thing, I didn't purchase this game to do PBEM. I purchased to play against the AI so by playable I mean against a challenging AI. PBEM may be where it's at for many but it's not for me. I only play against the AI.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.75