|
Gray_Lensman -> RE: Winter operations (2/5/2009 10:33:08 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GShock
Well i can ensure you that's not what happens with me. The only problem i have, personally, is that i would like development priorities and efforts to shift and manpower to be better organized so you don't have to see bugs still being discovered 7 months after the game's release. Generally speaking no game is bug-free but the segment AgeOD has chosen, and especially, the complexity and detail level of the engine, are a major bug source...nobody's fault but has to be countered properly.
Don't take it wrong Gray, of course i prize the volounteers' jobs, they are invaluable but this development style leaves the flank open to critics coming from grognards who expect everything to be perfect in a few weeks' time.
That the game becomes a real one after a year time is not something that the average user expects or cares for when he opens his wallet and the first days after the release are the most important sales-wise.
This "style" is my only problem with AgeOD and definitely not because i am disappointed, on the contrary, i keep doing whatever i can to help you guys. As i said, it's a pleasure to "come back" after months and see the game is still improved but that's just me, patient, confident, understanding all of what's behind, can't ask that from every user, you know that.
Unfortunately, none of this happens anymore with any PC games, primarily because they are now a niche market and can't support a large company infrastructure like they did 10 years or so ago. Recent Examples: Medieval Total War...Took 6 months for the first patch and almost 2 years before the second patch. Then instead of continuing the patching process for a defective game they offer up another patch in an expansion that you have to pay for. That's one example. Another one, is the recent flop Sid Meier's Civ IV Colonization. It's been out since mid fall and still not a word about a patch or even a hint if one is imminent. In contrast, AGEod continously offers update patches on a much more frequent basis along with actual enhancements (new additions) ported over from later game releases. Show me any other company doing that. AGEod really can't do anything about the "style", because of the limited manpower availability, (you just can't organize manpower that's not available in the first place.) It makes up for it with direct customer responses on a much faster basis than almost any other gaming company out there.
I would venture to say that the great majority of grognards are reasonably satisified with the way AGEod responds to their needs because most of them understand the limitations that all wargaming companies now operate under. It's only a disgruntled few who think that AGEod needs to reorganize it's entire development structure just to suit them.
The limitation to the "style" thing that you point out, is persons actually familiar with all aspects of putting together these turnkey data fixes with the supporting database .xls file changes. There's a lot of posters that are quite willing to point out flaws, but very few capable of actually implementing the changes necessary to fix the flaws in the manner necessary for inclusion in the "official" releases. Remember, just because a fix sounds simple to implement, generally it still has to be beta tested for side issues before it can be adopted. That by itself, takes a lot of extra time, but is absolutely necessary because you don't want to replace one bug with another one. I recently read a post by you where you claimed to have been a beta for many years. If such is the case, a little effort on your part and you could learn to do MODs for yourself instead of just making pronouncements and see for yourself, the necessary work required to see a bug fix all the way thru. This might be quite enlightening to you.
|
|
|
|
