RE: Just get it right.

RE: Just get it right. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames

Message

bredsjomagnus -> RE: Just get it right. (12/13/2008 6:02:13 PM)
I think that this is an exciting idea. But I also think that there is a risk involved. Mayby it sets a low quality stamp, just as pesk pesk mentioned. Why not just involve more beta testers instead?

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Just get it right. (12/13/2008 6:33:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus I think that this is an exciting idea. But I also think that there is a risk involved. Mayby it sets a low quality stamp, just as pesk pesk mentioned. Why not just involve more beta testers instead? Having hundreds of beta testers, where only a small percentage find new bugs, is expensive, since (contributing) beta testers get a free copy of the final release. Also, there is a heavy overhead for me to support beta testers, because of the frequent communications I have with each individual. Bringing new beta testers up to speed requires effort, and at times the end result is the beta tester doesn't contribute a whole lot. The better the beta tester is, the greater the level of communications. That is good for the final product[:)], but time consuming for me[:(]. And if you have been following this forum, you will know that my time is the scarcest resource.[sm=sad-1361.gif]

Sewerlobster -> RE: Just get it right. (12/14/2008 12:03:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Well, since this thread keeps getting posts, I'll float an idea that has been getting kicked around and see what you-all think. === The idea is to release an early version of the game to those who want to run it through its paces and see if it has lingering bugs that the beta testers didn't come across. There would be no reduction in price[:(] and the game would have the caveat that "things might go wrong".[sm=innocent0009.gif] Players who want to wait for a later version after several hundred have purchased the game and hammered away at it for several months, could cerainly do that.[sm=nono.gif] Players who are anxious to start playing MWIF and are willing to put up with potentially weekly/daily patches could jump right in.[sm=scared0008.gif] Very little thought/discussion has gone into this idea so far and there are numerous details that concern me (as the developer) about doing this.[sm=sad-1361.gif] But then, what do I know?[sm=dizzy.gif] The creators of Civ IV did something just like it. They enlisted a very large group of "gamma" testers. These were people who had played early incarnations of the game and were expert at it. It worked out well. Sadly I think you may have a shallower gene pool, so to speak -- but I like the idea. It should eliminate alot of the initial bugs just as it did for Civ IV -- no matter how hard you try, the beta testers are not a large enough group to catch all the quirks (and different computer set-ups) that a larger group can create. If it works, we won't have to hear the usual whining that every PC game gets because there was a bug.

jjax -> RE: Just get it right. (12/14/2008 1:29:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Well, since this thread keeps getting posts, I'll float an idea that has been getting kicked around and see what you-all think. === The idea is to release an early version of the game to those who want to run it through its paces and see if it has lingering bugs that the beta testers didn't come across. There would be no reduction in price[:(] and the game would have the caveat that "things might go wrong".[sm=innocent0009.gif] Players who want to wait for a later version after several hundred have purchased the game and hammered away at it for several months, could cerainly do that.[sm=nono.gif] Players who are anxious to start playing MWIF and are willing to put up with potentially weekly/daily patches could jump right in.[sm=scared0008.gif] Very little thought/discussion has gone into this idea so far and there are numerous details that concern me (as the developer) about doing this.[sm=sad-1361.gif] But then, what do I know?[sm=dizzy.gif] I would buy into that idea!

HansHafen -> RE: Just get it right. (12/14/2008 7:20:56 AM)
Lets do what needs to be done. I would buy.

Ohio Jones -> "Patience is a" something something... (12/14/2008 6:25:41 PM)
Am I tempted to say: "Damn the torpedoes - gimme gimme gimme!"? Absoutely! I want to see this game running on the Windows partition of my Mac ASAP (bet there's a scenario you haven't built into your testing plans!). But if it's been worth waiting this long, a little longer won't kill me, and - as some have expressed - I think there's a danger in rushing. Steve, you (and select others of course, but mostly you) have worked so hard, and for so long, to make this game really exceptional, I think it would be a shame to lessen the game's impact by releasing a not-ready-for-primetime version. You risk a backlash. Even if clearly labelled as a beta, you ris having both the gaming media and - more importantly - potential players slagging the product for its beta limitations. That said, I think some variation of what you have suggested here is inevitable. Given the complexity and sophistication of this game - which is, to my mind, far beyond that of your run-of-the-mill strategy game - there will doubtless be innumerable situations that you simply can't test for in a standard beta pool. It's extremely important to have Matrix's willingness to support refinements to the game on a go-forward basis as those issues are identified and resolved (heck, how many years of modifications and errata did we have to contend with regarding the paper rules, never mind coding them...). But I'd strongly recommend getting as far along the road to a finished product as reasonably possible before releasing, to give all your hard work the best possible chance of shining in the market. My $0.02 (Canadian, so adjust as necessary for exchange rates).

SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: "Patience is a" something something... (12/15/2008 1:08:26 AM)
Something Steve said made me wonder. If I bought a prerelease copy, I would expect a downloadable game or just a disk. I would want a copy at release time that had the last version of the disk and any goodies that will be in the retail game. PDF manual(s) would be fine with me.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: "Patience is a" something something... (12/15/2008 4:56:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer Something Steve said made me wonder. If I bought a prerelease copy, I would expect a downloadable game or just a disk. I would want a copy at release time that had the last version of the disk and any goodies that will be in the retail game. PDF manual(s) would be fine with me. Yes, program updates, including the version of the final released product, would be available at no additional cost to everyone who bought the 'gamma' version. You are probably correct that actual physical printing wouldn't necessary. But the documentation (player's manual) would need to be finished. There is no real reason for that to require additional 'testing' and I consider it a crucial element in judging whether the game 'works' or not.

micheljq -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 1:30:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: peskpesk Steve To get more testers involved is a very, very good plan! But personally I believe that selling the Beta of the game without the AI included faces the risk that people without testing experience quickly become tired. Since testing the game with only hot seat or just playing against yourself is a very cumbersome task. And hence the idea to increase the number of people pushing the game in different directions from dozens to hundreds will be come less effective. With AI included the testing will be come more fun and challenging, also the AI will be tested and needed improvements discovered. Also there is a risk with letting the game out on the market, even when it’s a Beta, that the game will get a low quality stamp. Even tough that is not the case. Peter I agree with peskpesk, there must be at least an AI to play against, if internet/PBEM is not ready. I won't play against myself that's for sure. This is not the purpose of buying a PC game.

wfzimmerman -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 2:24:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Well, since this thread keeps getting posts, I'll float an idea that has been getting kicked around and see what you-all think. === The idea is to release an early version of the game to those who want to run it through its paces and see if it has lingering bugs that the beta testers didn't come across. There would be no reduction in price[:(] and the game would have the caveat that "things might go wrong".[sm=innocent0009.gif] Players who want to wait for a later version after several hundred have purchased the game and hammered away at it for several months, could cerainly do that.[sm=nono.gif] Players who are anxious to start playing MWIF and are willing to put up with potentially weekly/daily patches could jump right in.[sm=scared0008.gif] Very little thought/discussion has gone into this idea so far and there are numerous details that concern me (as the developer) about doing this.[sm=sad-1361.gif] But then, what do I know?[sm=dizzy.gif] Terrible idea. It will ruin your credibility and the product's. I would not even have put this post on the public access forum.

meisterchow -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 4:36:09 PM)
Putting out a "gamma" version, no matter how desperately I want to get my grubby paws on any copy of MWiF, would probably be a bad marketing idea. Then the forums will be chock full of bug reports and issues and could turn away potential new customers.

wworld7 -> RE: "Patience is a" something something... (12/15/2008 6:13:10 PM)
While I would like to get my hands on this product. I would rather wait for completion. The downside risk a beta-release can have on this project is signifacant in the long-term IF many people are turned off by pre-mature release. Luckily, I do not have to make the choice, as I see upside potential also. There is no 100% right or wrong here. I wish you and MWiF the best whatever you decide.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 8:49:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets Well, since this thread keeps getting posts, I'll float an idea that has been getting kicked around and see what you-all think. === The idea is to release an early version of the game to those who want to run it through its paces and see if it has lingering bugs that the beta testers didn't come across. There would be no reduction in price[:(] and the game would have the caveat that "things might go wrong".[sm=innocent0009.gif] Players who want to wait for a later version after several hundred have purchased the game and hammered away at it for several months, could cerainly do that.[sm=nono.gif] Players who are anxious to start playing MWIF and are willing to put up with potentially weekly/daily patches could jump right in.[sm=scared0008.gif] Very little thought/discussion has gone into this idea so far and there are numerous details that concern me (as the developer) about doing this.[sm=sad-1361.gif] But then, what do I know?[sm=dizzy.gif] Terrible idea. It will ruin your credibility and the product's. I would not even have put this post on the public access forum. I find acquiring input from potential customers of tremendous benefit. Hearing from other interested parties about different ideas gives the ideas more breadth, depth, and weight. If people get upset simply from hearing different ideas (and there were a few posts in this thread along that line), I do not consider that a serious problem. In partricular, I do not follow up on many of the ideas I hear, or that I generate by myself. The response to this idea is definitely mixed.

wfzimmerman -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 8:59:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets quote: ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman Terrible idea. It will ruin your credibility and the product's. I would not even have put this post on the public access forum. I find acquiring input from potential customers of tremendous benefit. Hearing from other interested parties about different ideas gives the ideas more breadth, depth, and weight. If people get upset simply from hearing different ideas (and there were a few posts in this thread along that line), I do not consider that a serious problem. In partricular, I do not follow up on many of the ideas I hear, or that I generate by myself. The response to this idea is definitely mixed. The discussing/listening approach you describe is sound in a logic sense. In a marketing or political sense, there are some topics for which it is disproportionately unhelpful.

mavraamides -> RE: Just get it right. (12/15/2008 9:39:59 PM)
Add me to the list of players who would buy a pre-release version in a heartbeat if it had a serviceable AI. As long as its made clear that this is a 'gamma' version, I don't think there will be any bad PR.

kram -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 9:12:17 AM)
IMHO the idea of an early ‘gamma’ version released before the final product could be implemented with success and without bad marketing consequences if: 1) The version of the final released product bought, including eventually updated physical disk and printed manual, will be available at no additional cost to everyone who bought the corresponding 'gamma' version. 2) There will be a serviceable AI. 3) A closed forum, open only to the ‘gamma’ version buyers, will be created specifically to signal, solve and discuss bugs, remark, update and problems related to the released ‘gamma’ version.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 9:58:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kram IMHO the idea of an early ‘gamma’ version released before the final product could be implemented with success and without bad marketing consequences if: 1) The version of the final released product bought, including eventually updated physical disk and printed manual, will be available at no additional cost to everyone who bought the corresponding 'gamma' version. 2) There will be a serviceable AI. 3) A closed forum, open only to the ‘gamma’ version buyers, will be created specifically to signal, solve and discuss bugs, remark, update and problems related to the released ‘gamma’ version. Yes to all. Your #3 was part of the internal discussion about this. I hadn't mentioned it previously.

mlees -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 3:03:46 PM)
I would be interested in a pre-release product if it is possible to play out the entire war. I used to play CWIF solitaire. It usually crashed around the collapse (or sometimes during the formation of) Vichy. Heh. If MWIF is more stable than that, then I would be "ahead" of where I was four or five years ago. The only concern I would have is with the marketing & reviews of the game. I wouldn't want you or Matrix to be hurt by the perception that y'all knowingly released an unfinished game upon an unsuspecting public. Lazy writers will publish scathing reviews, hurting future sales of the product. (I call them lazy because if they don't bother to read the "readme/patch notes", they will not realise that the game is without all the features they might be expecting.) Care must be taken to ensure that the potential custumers are aware of the state of things. My apologies if I pointed out something way too obvious, and already being discussed behind the scenes.

mavraamides -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 6:34:21 PM)
I think the bottom line for most of us is this: We would rather play an 80% - 90% finished version of WIF complete with warts and provide feedback to help make it better and get done faster than play a 100% complete version of any other WWII grand strategy game currently available on the market. I think the marketing risks are over rated. Simply inform reviewers that this is essentially a paid, public beta. This to me seems like the fastest path to a complete, stable, working game. If people don't want to buy till its done, that's their choice. For the rest of us, its an opportunity to help and to get to start playing months before those who want to wait for it to be done.

warspite1 -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 7:58:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GordianKnot I think the bottom line for most of us is this: We would rather play an 80% - 90% finished version of WIF complete with warts and provide feedback to help make it better and get done faster than play a 100% complete version of any other WWII grand strategy game currently available on the market. I think the marketing risks are over rated. Simply inform reviewers that this is essentially a paid, public beta. This to me seems like the fastest path to a complete, stable, working game. If people don't want to buy till its done, that's their choice. For the rest of us, its an opportunity to help and to get to start playing months before those who want to wait for it to be done. Warspite1 Couldn`t have put it better myself.

sajbalk -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 11:11:35 PM)
Of course I want the game perfect and now. ;) Lacking that, I would not mind buying a gamma version on the terms discussed. This should provide an incentive to Steve to finish the product as the gamers vote with their wallets.

vadestir -> RE: Just get it right. (12/16/2008 11:47:23 PM)
I have been reading the forums for years now. Frist time to post my 2 cents. I'll wait for the complete game. how about a module of the game to play. 2-5 turns like , pearl harbor attack or finland/U.S.S.R. 39? that way you get feedback. testing on a lot of systems. People can see how works. it can turn into a great promoe for the game[:)]

Sewerlobster -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 3:31:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: wfzimmerman Terrible idea. It will ruin your credibility and the product's. I would not even have put this post on the public access forum. I could not disagree more. The one inevitable problem with PC games is that nearly everyone is playing the game on a different console. Even the operating system isn't necessarily the same, what with all the updates that each user could choose to not install. Every big PC game gets a big patch early on because it's impossible to test against all these different PC setups; and of course unique and rare game conditions. More testers is better. Tester that pay to test are cheaper than those who get paid (or are free). A larger gamma group would be helpful even if all they provide is little tidbits like: I own an Acme 2000 video card and had to change to coyote setting to run the game or some other some such quirk. Or worse yet, and there have been cases with other games, the betas simply overlook some common game proceedure that they thought they tested but somehow doesn't work with the final product. These things truly ruin credibility. The only real question is: does Matrix feel that the extra cost of a gamma be worth it?

Zorachus99 -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 4:19:12 PM)
I agree with this as well. However, I would propose that the Barbarossa and Guadalcanal scenarios be made public. One demonstrates the land system, the other naval. Both are 5 turns if I remember correctly. The idea of creating ANOTHER scenario might make Steve run for the hills... The scenarios already in the game are the ones that have been published by ADG for Wif, which means hundreds of hours of game value. I'm wonder if piracy / license control issues make Steve lose sleep. [sm=00000117.gif]

Froonp -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 8:37:58 PM)
I don't think it is a good idea to release an unfinished game, or even only a short scenario. I even think it is the worst of the worst ideas. Some people won't know it is a non finished game, and this will ruin its reputation for when it is really finished. I hope Matrix never agrees to do that. MWiF should stay unpublished until it is finished.

Froonp -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 8:41:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GordianKnot GordianKnot, would you be interested in a better looking Iowa BB avatar like this one ? Of course, if you're worried that this makes you have the same BB Avatar as sajbalk, I can make you another one from the tens of MWiF BBs. [image]local://upfiles/10447/9F81396C5D0B4F9FA102E2B53350C38A.gif[/image]

Ohio Jones -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 8:46:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp I don't think it is a good idea to release an unfinished game, or even only a short scenario. I even think it is the worst of the worst ideas. Some people won't know it is a non finished game, and this will ruin its reputation for when it is really finished. I hope Matrix never agrees to do that. MWiF should stay unpublished until it is finished. Notwithstanding my original comments (which were in favour of waiting), releasing a scenario as a demo needn't be confusing, if it's clearly packaged as a demo. But I'm not sure how much value this will bring Steve: you wouldn't be testing the full game, and you'd still need to wrap all the marketing around it to make it a demo (as well as needing to ensure all the pices of the demo were working fully). That may still be an interesting and useful option for Matrix to explore once the game is complete and stable, as a way of getting people into the game. For now, though, I think the idea was more to release the full game as a "gamma", where people would effectively be paying for the opportunity to test the system early and broaden the feedback at Steve's disposal. If this is seriously considered, I think it's important that it remain a closed test, which brings with it all sorts of administrative headaches. Does charging your beta (er, gamma) testers generate more committed, useful testers? Maybe, maybe not. But I'm not convinced it's a viable course.

Orm -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 9:16:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp I don't think it is a good idea to release an unfinished game, or even only a short scenario. I even think it is the worst of the worst ideas. Some people won't know it is a non finished game, and this will ruin its reputation for when it is really finished. I hope Matrix never agrees to do that. MWiF should stay unpublished until it is finished. I agree with Froonp on this. -Orm

lomyrin -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 9:43:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Orm quote: ORIGINAL: Froonp I don't think it is a good idea to release an unfinished game, or even only a short scenario. I even think it is the worst of the worst ideas. Some people won't know it is a non finished game, and this will ruin its reputation for when it is really finished. I hope Matrix never agrees to do that. MWiF should stay unpublished until it is finished. I agree with Froonp on this. -Orm Here is another voice in agreement, do not release an unfinished product. Lars

Morval_slith -> RE: Just get it right. (12/17/2008 10:14:08 PM)
With only four months before the balloon goes up, it seems to me that the benefits of a paid "gamma" would be limited. Releasing a demo would be less risky; it is universally understood that a demo does not neccessarily represent the final release version. The real question is what is the objective? Is it to generate additional feedback (Steve already seems to have more than he can handle), drum up some pre-release revenue, or just to give us jonesing addicts a taste - dare I say, a WIF - to tide us over the winter?

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

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.59375