RE: CoG and EiA

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: CoG and EiA

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/15/2005 8:11:40 PM

9thlegere

Posts: 39
Joined: 5/8/2004
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

No I just personally don't like it when people over-exagerate a problem. I have no problem speaking out against those kinds of 'problems'.

So you don't think not being able to reliably fight the tactical battles is a problem? Seems a good few paying customers think it is and the game designers do as well but according to you they are just a bunch of whiners and exagerators!

quote:

Depends... what are they?

My wife for starters.

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 61

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/16/2005 12:19:42 AM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

So you don't think not being able to reliably fight the tactical battles is a problem?

Either you didn't read my other posts or you are being facetious...which one is it?

quote:

Seems a good few paying customers think it is and the game designers do as well but according to you they are just a bunch of whiners and exagerators!

Yes, when someone says they can't play at all, that is an exageration. Such as when someone said, "You buy a product with the expectation it will work." The product works, I've played it from start to victory. How could I have done that if it didn't work even though I am experiencing ctd's in detailed battles? Now if there were no quick battles or if quick battles also caused ctd's, then no, the product would not work. However this is not the case.

Does this ring a bell? "... suppose I am being a little harsh but I am getting a little frustrated." Sounds like exageration due to frustration to me.

They said the ctd should be now fixed in their first patch and prior to this the game was able to be completed from start to end. So yes, I think it's pretty clear that you and a couple others are exagerating and whining.

quote:

My wife for starters.

Hmm... maybe. Need to check under the hood though to see exactly what needs to be fixed!

< Message edited by Reiryc -- 7/16/2005 2:38:38 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to 9thlegere)

Post #: 62

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/16/2005 1:03:36 PM

9thlegere

Posts: 39
Joined: 5/8/2004
From: Scotland
Status: offline

I bought the game with the expectation of playing tactical battles, not to by pass them. I never said at any point the game never worked at all. You believe that becasue you can bypass the tactical battles the game is still playable, I don't think that I ought to skip any part of the game as it was advertised just so that I can get it to the end.

I vented my frustrations about this on the EIA board as hopefully it will be read by some and they can use this to decide whether or not to buy the game (and maybe the EIA will not have such a serious bug in it too which will spoil peoples enjoyment of it).

Had I known that the tactical parts would crash so often, I may have waited until it was fixed before buying it. I at least thought it was fair that others knew this.

But you seem to have taken it upon yourself to go on some crusade and attack anyone who dared say the game had serious problems.

We differ on what we view as problems

but whatever

I'm getting bored with you petty jibes now.

you can have the last word.

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 63

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/16/2005 4:55:11 PM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: 9thlegere

I bought the game with the expectation of playing tactical battles, not to by pass them. I never said at any point the game never worked at all. You believe that becasue you can bypass the tactical battles the game is still playable, I don't think that I ought to skip any part of the game as it was advertised just so that I can get it to the end.

I vented my frustrations about this on the EIA board as hopefully it will be read by some and they can use this to decide whether or not to buy the game (and maybe the EIA will not have such a serious bug in it too which will spoil peoples enjoyment of it).

Had I known that the tactical parts would crash so often, I may have waited until it was fixed before buying it. I at least thought it was fair that others knew this.

But you seem to have taken it upon yourself to go on some crusade and attack anyone who dared say the game had serious problems.

We differ on what we view as problems

but whatever

I'm getting bored with you petty jibes now.

you can have the last word.

Why is holding you to your own comments a 'petty jibe'?

Explain to me how this sentence, "You buy a product with the expectation it will work." doesn't indicate that the product doesn't work?

You vented your frustrations here and I decided they needed counter-balance due to their over-exagerations. You are entitled to post your views and I am entitled to post mine (while following the board rules of course). Spare me the drama-queen bit about a crusade. If I was on a crusade against anyone who "who dared say the game had serious problems" then you'd find the support board full of posts from my 'crusade'. When you first posted your problem on the support board, I posted what help suggestions were available at that time to give you a hand since we both were experiencing the same problems. Hardly the actions of someone on a crusade "who dared say the game had serious problems".

I think you should learn to differentiate the difference between someone criticizing another for a problem and criticizing another for how they go about expressing that problem.

We don't differ on what we view as problems, we differ on how we go about expressing our issues with those problems.

_____________________________

(in reply to 9thlegere)

Post #: 64

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/16/2005 9:44:29 PM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

Only on Matrix fora could a fanboi be so rabid as to defend a game where about 1/2 the game doesn't work for poeple

If tactical battles aren't necessary, then why did the developers bother putting it in the game?

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 65

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/16/2005 9:55:41 PM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

Only on Matrix fora could a fanboi be so rabid as to defend a game where about 1/2 the game doesn't work for poeple

If tactical battles aren't necessary, then why did the developers bother putting it in the game?

Probably to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

_____________________________

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 66

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 12:05:18 AM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

The biggest frustration for me continues to be the poorly prepared manaul...too many little known rules and issues are cropping up, and if it wasn't for the forum help, playing the game would be more confusing than necessary and unenjoyable, and I do not consider that an exageration....

If any EiA people are actually reading this thread, please take the time to do the manual properly. I know I'm repeating myself here but this is the EiA forum not CoG's, so I want to bring us back to what is relavent to THIS game.......explaining a rule is not enough but how one implements a rule is, and remember there will be an audience for this game who have never played EiA the board game, so do not assume a sketchy description will be understood by people because of their board game pedigree.....sometimes the nuts and bolts of how to play the game gets buried in the minutia so I'll take a plain detailed manual, berift of fancy photos and historical anecdotes, any day, than something fancy which glosses over too many of the game points in order to keep the page count down....

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 67

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 5:02:28 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

Isn't the game's purpose to be entertainment value? I suppose if the loading screen worked and nothing else, your statement would still be true.

But keep up the good work, it's very entertaining. Perhaps you'll get a pat on the head from someone for your steadfast defence of the game.

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 68

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 5:17:17 AM

jchastain

Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline

Just to clarify a few points:

1. It isn't that tactical battles in CoG do not work at all. For most people, they work fine the vast majority of the time. A few people are experiencing significant problems and occasional currupt savegames seem to make tactical battles unplayable. This situation is clearly unacceptable and the game should always work for everyone, but it also would be unfair to say that they do not work at all. To their credit, the Dev team has promised to address this in the first patch and beta testers are reporting that they think the problem has been solved. We'll see.

2. The manual certainly doesn't explain everything clearly. Even worse, in a few instances it is outright wrong. Clearly some of the late beta changes did not get addressed in the manual. However, again, the game is playable. It requires you to learn and discover some things that many may prefer to have explained to them. And again the Devs have committed to provide additional details in a future patch.

While we as consumers may not enjoy it, software quality standards in the PC gaming industry have gone done significantly as patch distribution has become easier and more widespread. If you compare PC products to cartridge based systems where patches are not available, the difference in quality at release is striking. Essentially all companies are using us as their unpaid testers and counting on the fact that they can issue a patch to correct any problems. Of course, this development is our fault as consumers since we have generally accepted the lower level of quality and continue to buy products that are not truly ready for prime time.

So, with that as a backdrop, I would say that CoG isn't perfect but it is at least as good as most products released these days. I personally think it is unfair to criticize that game too much as I believe they are the norm rather than the exception. However, I can only applaud those who make a stand and decide not to buy products until the are truly finished. As for me, I'm weak. I'm part of the problem. I bought the game and I am enjoying it thoroughly.

(in reply to Hanal)

Post #: 69

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 6:02:14 AM

Naomi

Posts: 654
Joined: 6/21/2005
From: Osaka
Status: offline

I desire all the threads in this section coming into the eyes of CoG's developers.

(in reply to jchastain)

Post #: 70

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 4:59:17 PM

Ron

Posts: 506
Joined: 6/6/2002
Status: offline

Well I, and the handfull of those I know who bought and are playing CoG right now, will state unequivically the game works as advertised without any crashes or errors, whether in the strategic phase or in the detailed battles.(knock on wood) And no I am not a fanboy and from what I have read of this thread neither is Reiryc. The 'rabid' ones are those saying CoG is 'broke', it isn't. Does it work perfectly for everyone? No of course not and I am sure that can be said for just about every other major game released today. Are the developers working to correct things in a patch? From all reports yes, so while I can sympathize with those having problems, been in the same boat myself with some games, the best course obviously is to wait and take a chill pill. Then again this is the EIA forum so perhaps, just maybe, some poster's motives are a little more than 'technical issues' with CoG.

Ron

(in reply to Naomi)

Post #: 71

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 5:42:13 PM

Jabba

Posts: 62
Joined: 3/24/2005
Status: offline

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

(in reply to Ron)

Post #: 72

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 6:07:25 PM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

That's a riot!.......This is the only active thread in this forum and you want it moved?...

(in reply to Jabba)

Post #: 73

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/17/2005 6:26:12 PM

malcolm_mccallum

Posts: 79
Joined: 10/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

(in reply to Jabba)

Post #: 74

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 12:07:17 AM

Naomi

Posts: 654
Joined: 6/21/2005
From: Osaka
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: malcolm_mccallum

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

It should've be posted on the other side as well, as both teams are sharing, and working to, the common goal of letting out an ideal Napoleonic genre.

(in reply to malcolm_mccallum)

Post #: 75

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 12:15:50 AM

oldtimer

Posts: 48
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

If you compare PC products to cartridge based systems where patches are not available, the difference in quality at release is striking. Essentially all companies are using us as their unpaid testers and counting on the fact that they can issue a patch to correct any problems. Of course, this development is our fault as consumers since we have generally accepted the lower level of quality and continue to buy products that are not truly ready for prime time.

Jchastain, you have to remember when you are programming in a cartridge environment you don't have to worry as much about all the variables of hardware and software that one must consider for a PC. That makes programming a little easier.

(in reply to jchastain)

Post #: 76

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 1:18:00 AM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Naomi

quote:

ORIGINAL: malcolm_mccallum

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

It should've be posted on the other side as well, as both teams are sharing, and working to, the common goal of letting out an ideal Napoleonic genre.

I believe many of the questions raised here have cropped up on the CoG forum as well so both sides have it covered. The benefit on this end however is that, unlike CoG, EiA has not yet been released, so there is a chance, albiet a small one, that something in this thread might prove helpful to EiA at the outset, and not await the need for the first patch....

< Message edited by J P Falcon -- 7/18/2005 1:19:10 AM >

(in reply to Naomi)

Post #: 77

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 3:31:45 AM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

Isn't the game's purpose to be entertainment value? I suppose if the loading screen worked and nothing else, your statement would still be true.

But keep up the good work, it's very entertaining. Perhaps you'll get a pat on the head from someone for your steadfast defence of the game.

Do you own the game?

Or are you speaking in ignorance?

Btw... you might find some others here who are speaking the same language as me:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=902978

The first and second posts echo my sentiments. Guess that makes us fanboys...

< Message edited by Reiryc -- 7/18/2005 3:35:41 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 78

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 5:16:17 PM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc

Do you own the game?

Or are you speaking in ignorance?

Btw... you might find some others here who are speaking the same language as me:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=902978

The first and second posts echo my sentiments. Guess that makes us fanboys...

Your denial that a significant piece of the game (tactical battles) which does not work universally, is a major problem is what I contend.

Fortunately I haven't bought the game yet, that must make me ignorant. Although you seem to have similar venomous language for anyone who criticises it, here and in the CoG forum.

Seriously, you're doing great work keep it up!

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 79

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 8:13:56 PM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

Your denial that a significant piece of the game (tactical battles) which does not work universally, is a major problem is what I contend.

If I read your statement correctly, that tactical battles does not work universally, then you are wrong. They work for most people but a few have issues that cause a crash, myself included. If I have read your statement accurately, then it only reinforces the view that you are ignorant of the situation as I contend.

Additionally, there are plenty of people who do not use the tactical battles because they prefer the quicker and simpler resolution of the 'quick battles' format.

quote:

Fortunately I haven't bought the game yet, that must make me ignorant.

Indeed it does...as evidenced by your posts.

quote:

Although you seem to have similar venomous language for anyone who criticises it, here and in the CoG forum.

Venomous language?

Please... I haven't used any venomous language yet, although I wouldn't mind with a couple people who, imo, have earned some.

quote:

Seriously, you're doing great work keep it up!

Yes I am and will continue! So I guess you ignored the link provided and they must all be fanboys as well, especially the first two that mirror my sentiments. Keep on babbling in ignorance, it's keeping me quite entertained on the forum.

< Message edited by Reiryc -- 7/18/2005 8:27:32 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 80

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/18/2005 8:29:52 PM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

I could do with a portabello mushroom and chedder cheese omelet right about now..........

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 81

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/19/2005 6:11:32 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
If I read your statement correctly, that tactical battles does not work universally, then you are wrong. They work for most people but a few have issues that cause a crash, myself included. If I have read your statement accurately, then it only reinforces the view that you are ignorant of the situation as I contend.

You claimed that the non-working tactical portion didn't affect the game. I ask, why include it if it doesn't matter if it works or not.

quote:

Indeed it does...as evidenced by your posts.

All one needs is the ability to read to understand the problems with the game :)

quote:

Venomous language? Please... I haven't used any venomous language yet, although I wouldn't mind with a couple people who, imo, have earned some.

Yes you have. Your name stuck with me after reading that forum as someone consistently rude and abrasive. Perhaps it was when you told someone to ebay their game, or one of the other posts you don't consider rude, but you are at least consistent (which is more than many say about the game.)

But you've done be a favour. I got about half way through the ordering process before cancelling and seeing what the feedback was a week or so into the game. What I've learnt over the last few years is that when there are significant complaints of bugs, and a manic poster (or posters) with the pathological desire to shut anyone up who complains about their object of affection, then there's usually something seriously wrong.

So keep up the good work! Eventually, it will be you and the other 10 guys who still post in COG, and I'm sure you folks will support and pay for the next game.

(in reply to Reiryc)

Post #: 82

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/19/2005 7:02:03 AM

Reiryc

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline

quote:

You claimed that the non-working tactical portion didn't affect the game. I ask, why include it if it doesn't matter if it works or not.

I answered why it should be included, for entertainment. It doesn't work for some people, but for most it does work.

quote:

All one needs is the ability to read to understand the problems with the game :)

Sadly, you haven't demonstrated the ability to read and understand the problems. You've suggested that a portion of the game does not work universally. This is absolutely incorrect. Like I said, you are demonstrating ignorance of the game and it's problems. No doubt my pointing out your ignorance makes me a fanboy, but such is life...

quote:

Yes you have. Your name stuck with me after reading that forum as someone consistently rude and abrasive.

Yeah, mean 'ole reiryc... he should just jump on the bandwagon and exagerate the problems. Daring to hold anyone accountable for their overblown hyperbole toward the game is just oh so venomous.

In fact, I was so mean, that when 9thlegere first posted his problem, I dared to try to help him with some tips that were being passed around as possible work arounds. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=890361&mpage=2 Yep, doesn't get much more venomous then that....

However, want to see a post with rudeness? Then look no further than your first foray into this thread. With now demonstrated ignorance of the game, you jump and accuse someone of being a "fanboi for defending a game which doesn't work for half the people." This statement is both rude and wrong on my view of the game and the problems it has.

quote:

But you've done be a favour. I got about half way through the ordering process before cancelling and seeing what the feedback was a week or so into the game. What I've learnt over the last few years is that when there are significant complaints of bugs, and a manic poster (or posters) with the pathological desire to shut anyone up who complains about their object of affection, then there's usually something seriously wrong.

Well I have to hand it to ya... you're an excellent poster at being able spouting off false non-sense consistently and continuously.

However, you are missing out on a fun game, despite it's problems. The game seems to be doing pretty well, atleast according to paul vebber who, assuming his position in the matrix staff would put him 'in the know'. http://prochelo.com/stl-web/bulletin/bb/viewtopic.php?t=8073 "Everybody has an opinion...Many Like it, Many Don't. Doing an "advanced version allows the things those that don't like the "basic version" to have a chance to get what they want, without "ruining" the game that many do like (its currently or top seller - bu quite a margin - though Crown of Glory looks to be catching up."

< Message edited by Reiryc -- 7/19/2005 7:47:18 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 83

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/20/2005 7:22:03 AM

jchastain

Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: oldtimer

quote:

If you compare PC products to cartridge based systems where patches are not available, the difference in quality at release is striking. Essentially all companies are using us as their unpaid testers and counting on the fact that they can issue a patch to correct any problems. Of course, this development is our fault as consumers since we have generally accepted the lower level of quality and continue to buy products that are not truly ready for prime time.

Jchastain, you have to remember when you are programming in a cartridge environment you don't have to worry as much about all the variables of hardware and software that one must consider for a PC. That makes programming a little easier.

That is absolutely true. Programming for a cartridge is easier. But it still doesn't change the fact that quality levels in PC games has declined significantly over the past 20 years as it has become easier and more accepted to distribute patches. If anything, the hardware environment has been simplified a bit since those early days since we didn't have windows abstracting everything. Back then, each game had to have "drivers" for each sound card and video mode that was to be supported. There is still a ton of variability in PCs and it is certainly harder to ensure a quality experience for everyone. But there is also very little incentive to really try in earnest and most (if not all) gaming companies are taking advantage of the current lax expectations. And some (*cough* paradox *cough*) seem to take that flexibility to rather significant extremes IMO. There is no doubt in my mind that if consumers demanded a higher level of quality, companies could provide it. But so long as there is no demand for them to do so (and to be honest, often times boards like this are clamoring for release - not pressing for continued testing), companies will continue to release "good enough" products instead of "nearly perfect" ones.

(in reply to oldtimer)

Post #: 84

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/20/2005 7:38:02 AM

oldtimer

Posts: 48
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline

quote:

But it still doesn't change the fact that quality levels in PC games has declined significantly over the past 20 years as it has become easier and more accepted to distribute patches. If anything, the hardware environment has been simplified a bit since those early days since we didn't have windows abstracting everything.

I agree with the first part of your statement in that the quality of programming has gone down. I am not so sure I agree with the second part about it being easier to program to the hardware environment. I was a programmer way back in the old days and because of lack of resources on a computer system and mainframe usage was a premium a person had to be very careful with how they programmed (this is after the punch cards). Now-a-days it is a race to slap together a program and not worry about wasted lines of code or inefficient coding because the PC resources will compensate for the waste. This is because hardware resources have gotten cheaper and faster and patching has become more efficient and acceptable.

I have been caught several times in recent months where a program does not function becuase hardware changed (chipset, video card, etc). These hardware changes are coming at a rapid pace and has made it harder for many programmers even the OS can't keep up.

Another variable that I eluded to earlier is the fact that even if I have identical hardware I may have tweaked my software some or installed a protection scheme or some other software that you didn't that <i>might</i> impact how a particular program runs that is totally foreign to what the programmers of the game concieved of running across.

This was just further explaining my opinion I think from what I read we are in similiar agreement.

(in reply to jchastain)

Post #: 85

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/21/2005 7:16:19 AM

Marshall Ellis

Posts: 5630
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Hey guys:

Love this conversation since I've been programming since '84 and had to drop my 2 cents...

It's been real ODD seeing the morphing of this industry and how the Internet has allowed many things to happen.

Patching in the 80's was close to impossible BUT game design (Especially graphical) was MUCH more simple thus games tended to be more solid i.e. debugging 10,000 lines of code was much easier and more definitive than 200,000 lines (Pong versus Doom) ! Also the install base was MUCH smaller than where we are today (I believe Mr Gate's current financial status helps reinforce that stat :-) ) so the demand was much smaller back then. Patching became more feasible when the sound cards and graphics cards starting increasing in their feature sets thus requiring a driver / patch download and much of this was acomplished through the use of bulletin boards (remember those?). This created the demanding customer who wanted his patch because now there was a vehicle of delivery so excuses were now gone!

Ever since there was a delivery vehicle (especially the Internet) in place for patches, customers have become more demanding (rightfully so) that bugs be fixed. Remember in the early days many companies didn't even fix bugs, they just made a new title "Game Name 2" and sold it to you in a newer box with a few more features. Can you imagine a game company trying that today?

I do find myself sometimes taking the easy way of programming a certain part of code (i.e. loading an entire data base in memory as opposed to tracking several file pointers and reading when needed) BUT this also has its advantages such as SPEED so there are some trade-offs BUT you bet that I take advantage of the BIG hardware resources that I have today.

I think game complexity has risen above our capacity to properly kill all bugs in a timely manner! There is a medium in here somehwere (When to release) that I honestly don't know where it is ???
Bottom line is that the programmer is ALWAYS going to get screamed at. It is our lot in life!

Sorry for the rant but the subject is quite interesting to me!

Thank you

_____________________________

Thank you

Marshall Ellis
Outflank Strategy War Games

(in reply to oldtimer)

Post #: 86

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/21/2005 8:17:12 AM

jchastain

Posts: 2164
Joined: 8/8/2003
From: Marietta, GA
Status: offline

That wasn't truly a rant. I actually think we are all pretty much in general agreement: Because of increased overall complexity as well as modern economic realities, companies today do not (and probably cannot) even try to release a perfect product. Everyone, both developers and end users, expect a certain number of bugs that will not be resolved until after release and count on the fact that patches will be available some of which may even be important for the overall gaming experience. I think we have come to take for granted that a certain base of users will complain about product quality after release and that increased quality may reduce the number doing so, but it will never eliminate it entirely regardless of the actual level of quality. I suspect most producers and developers have a difficult time knowing when precisely a game is "good enough" as the determination is as much art as science. (And I think if we are completely honest we will also confess that several factors other than just code quality creep into that equasion.)

(in reply to Marshall Ellis)

Post #: 87

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/21/2005 2:40:45 PM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

And how about the bugs found in our old Avalon Hill, SPI, GDW boardgames?...rememember awaiting for your copy of the General or S&T in order to get the errata sheet for a game because the rules did not work?.......or how about finding a counter sheet included in the mag because the movement points were printed wrong on the units. Sometimes these sheets were cardboard mounted, other times they were simply paper which you would cut up and glue onto the original counters...in those days it was these magazine's letters page where one would find gamers complaining about a rule or a geographical misprint, and the editors writing corrections ("on hex 484 change Minsk to Kiev"or "hexes 678,679 and 680 are continuous rail hexes")...Marshall writes of the complexity of computers, coding ect. and the difficulties that entails. I bring up simple,yet complex, paper and cardboard games which also had problems, including expected release dates never materializing. For example, Avalon Hill's sister game to The Third Reich, Rising Sun, took years to finally see the light of day. Developers were changed, release dates passed, and then it disappeared completely, only to be resurrected like a Phoenix many, many years later....... nothing has changed from board to pc gaming because it is not automans developing these games, and none of us are perfect....

So, waiting for a game, and having the ability to bitch, moan, and groan on this forum, is the natural evolution of wargaming history...........

< Message edited by J P Falcon -- 7/22/2005 12:34:54 AM >

(in reply to jchastain)

Post #: 88

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/28/2005 1:33:57 AM

marc420

Posts: 224
Joined: 9/23/2002
From: Terrapin Station
Status: offline

Actually, the cool thing about the old AH board games was that two (or more) players could agree on what the rules should be ... and immediately change them. Didn't have to wait on a programmer to get you a patch to say, just for instance, "when a unit with a Plunder order is magically teleported home when peace is declared, then the unit doesn't just automatically plunder its home country." All it took was two reasonable people to agree on a rules change. Insto-presto, a better game.

I like CoG, but to me it just barely cleared a low hurdle to say its ready for release. It basically works, but it seems very rough in many places. I think it will be an excellent game after several patches.

You can get me going on the low standards of the game industry. Expecting customers to essentially write the manuals through posts on forums is just one of the many areas the game industry gets its customers to do their work for them. If this was freeware, I wouldn't mind. Its when I see a $30 or $40 bill on my credit card that this gets annoying.

On tactical battles in CoG, this was one of the reasons I bought the game. Basically, I love the games along the lines of Age of Rifles, so a game that combines a strategic game with a tactical battle game along those line is nirvana to me. I don't have any ctd issues with the battles. Those are limited to a group of people with certain graphics cards if I've read the posts right.

My problem with the tactical battles is that I feel I'm unbalancing the game by constantly thrashing the AI in the tactical battle game. I suspect I'll eventually shelve that part of the game because of that. Meanwhile, there are also problems in using just quick battles. There are no leader casaulties at all in quick battles (I get the impression some beta testers lost Napoleon in a quick battle and got that whole bit pulled from the release). And a lot of the military upgrades you can get don't have any impact on quick battles (ie, training your troops to better form an emergency square with less chance of disorder -- can be handy in a tactical battle, but rather useless in the quick battles). There's this level of things not being entirely thought out or pulled together that frustrates me with CoG right now.

If there's anything the EiA programmers can take from CoG, its the fact that you need a powerful tactical battle AI to make such a tactical battle system fit into a strategic game. So while I was excited to see the tactical battles, I've come to feel that in a strategic game I'm more interested in a battle resolution system that correctly applies the results back to the strategic game. I can always dust off Age of Rifles again when I want to fight on that level.

I suspect I'll end up owning both games. I'm guessing because of its board game roots the first release of EiA will be more solid than CoG's first release. I'm assuming its a simpler system, and also one that's well tested. But the CoG team seems to already be planning mulitple patches, and if they do it right they can pull that together into a very nice game.

_____________________________

Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism. ~George Washington

(in reply to Hanal)

Post #: 89

RE: CoG and EiA - 7/29/2005 1:41:11 PM

YohanTM2

Posts: 1143
Joined: 10/7/2002
From: Toronto
Status: offline

I think your comments are quite fair and having been a playtester for WaW and a few of the old Talonsoft games I can tell you nobody has ever said...this will do.

But, with a finite group of playtesters on only a small number of machines things are bound to slip through. A lot of the focus of playtesting is on process and sometimes overall gameplay and strategy might not get all the attention they deserve. Also, with this again finite group of testers there is often debate (as there is in all the forums) over what is a good strategy and what is gamey and what is just wrong. Sometimes it needs a wider audience just to get a better perspective.

I was very impressed with the development team and other testers of WaW.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jchastain

That wasn't truly a rant. I actually think we are all pretty much in general agreement: Because of increased overall complexity as well as modern economic realities, companies today do not (and probably cannot) even try to release a perfect product. Everyone, both developers and end users, expect a certain number of bugs that will not be resolved until after release and count on the fact that patches will be available some of which may even be important for the overall gaming experience. I think we have come to take for granted that a certain base of users will complain about product quality after release and that increased quality may reduce the number doing so, but it will never eliminate it entirely regardless of the actual level of quality. I suspect most producers and developers have a difficult time knowing when precisely a game is "good enough" as the determination is as much art as science. (And I think if we are completely honest we will also confess that several factors other than just code quality creep into that equasion.)

quote:

That wasn't truly a rant. I actually think we are all pretty much in general agreement: Because of increased overall complexity as well as modern economic realities, companies today do not (and probably cannot) even try to release a perfect product. Everyone, both developers and end users, expect a certain number of bugs that will not be resolved until after release and count on the fact that patches will be available some of which may even be important for the overall gaming experience. I think we have come to take for granted that a certain base of users will complain about product quality after release and that increased quality may reduce the number doing so, but it will never eliminate it entirely regardless of the actual level of quality. I suspect most producers and developers have a difficult time knowing when precisely a game is "good enough" as the determination is as much art as science. (And I think if we are completely honest we will also confess that several factors other than just code quality creep into that equasion.)

(in reply to jchastain)

Post #: 90