Fed Up

[JCrowe]

The sad irony here (I think), is that the anger steaming off this forum is coming (in part) from the fact that the product could be such a great game - one this genre hasn't seen live up to full potential in a very, very long time. And here it is, yet another strategy game of global domination, riding on the edge of glory but never quite making it over to the promised land. So close, so far. Combine this frustration with what appears to be a wall of uncomprehending silence, and the fur begins to fly.

I gotta say, though, that I find the response from Aaron / Malf difficult to believe. After the last blow-up, we were instructed to post bug issues / AI problems / etc. to this thread. Copy-paste-done. To ad infinitum, no less. Since that post, there are at least a dozen following that discuss very specific failings in the AI's approach - many of which, I'll add, remained 100% unchanged since v1.01.

I'd also add that I - ALONE - have submitted a small book of specific suggestions and problem notes, direct to Aaron, before and after Blow Up #1, and only a fraction of those seem to have caught notice. And when you consider how much material others have contributed ... we're not talkin' "book", we're talking "epic novel" on the order of "War & Peace - The Extended Director's Cut".

So, where are we supposed to be now? Ditch the thread and submit direct to Malf and hope they don't switch the policy again? Wait six months and see what one or two suggestions / fixes out of 4,000 submitted "make the cut"?

Look - full admission. I don't know how to write software code. I don't have the skills to read the lines and offer suggestions for rewrites to transform this AI from a dead frog in a barrel to Erwin Rommel. Guess you could call it a personal failing of mine. I expect I'm not alone in that. So, I followed the guidance, and in concert with all the other fine, devoted folks on here, offered the best theoretical guidance and real-life examples I had for support. Theory, practice, and documented "real life" events, filed and submitted in no less than three different formats.

What else can we do?

Open question to the peeps from Shrappie - the Admins, Prelates, Overlords, etc. of this board - am I being unfair?

I know you guys are kinda stuck in the middle of this, but if you tone-out the vitriol and just stick to the bare facts, what conclusions do you draw?

I'm feeling generous, so I'll admit to something else - I won't ask for a refund. It was $30, not my life savings, and yeah, I could have played the demo and ducked the bullet on day one. So shame on me, and a plague of fleas upon my house if I'm less than overwhelmed. But in business, it's not the dollar spent yesterday that matters quite so much as the dollars yet to come - or not, as the case may be. I've bought stuff off Shrapnel before and liked what I got. (SpaceHorse - too awesome.) Keeps me coming back. It was the confidence I built up from those past buys that had me skip the demo and go direct to 'sale'.

What lesson am I to have learned?

?

Avoid Malf, and give any new offering on Shrapnel a wide berth until others have vetted it in depth with their dollars, first?

Fair? Unfair?

[spillblood]

Yeah, I think we've already detailed the post patch 1.09 AI flaws in enough detail in the threads that were made for this purpose by Shrapnel. It sucks that we have to repeat all stuff several times before Malf notices it. Makes things a lot harder. I hope he reads the compilation of threads I sent him.

[Skirmisher]

Originally Posted by Malfador Machinations

Just wanted to put in my 2 cents.

Only you know the problems.

Aaron

What is your opinion of this game?

If you bothered to read what's going on here, you would see your WS fanbase isn't particularly impressed with your product.

I'm having difficulty with your distant,developer in hiding approach. But I would like to understand where you think your coming from.

[spillblood]

Wanna give additional details of how this compilation of bug reports/ feature requests from the forum by E-Mail directly to Aaron turned out. I've collected all important posts that were made during the beta phase and edited them a bit to make the messages clearer. His answer was: "Please post these and all future correspondences to the forum.
Aaron"
I don't know yet what to make of this, and what he wanted to say. Does he want me to post all E-Mail correspondence in the forum, or did he mean that he doesn't need those texts and wants me to post this only here and not E-Mail it to him? I'm not sure.

[Malfador Machinations]

Hi All,

Yes, I have received the manifestos, and yes I have read the forums. 75% of the manifestos are change and addition suggestions. The remaining 25% are general descriptions of why the AI is not strong enough. General descriptions are very difficult to reproduce. I need specifics.

The following information should be in bug reports:
1. Version of the Game
2. Type of game you're playing - Single Player, Multi Player, Hotseat, TCP/IP.
3. Section of the game - Movement, Combat, Install, Purchasing, AI, etc.
4. Detailed Description
5. Why you feel this is incorrect behavior.
6. Steps to reproduce
7. Savegame
8. Screenshots
9. Debug Log

Obviously, you can't provide all of the preceeding information in every case. But savegames and screenshots are very important. AI actions often develop over several turns. I need to be able to see what the player is doing, and how the AI is reacting to it. AI behavior is strongly dictated by the player's actions. A different player will get a different reaction.

Aaron

[ScottWAR]

Originally Posted by Malfador Machinations

Hi All,

Yes, I have received the manifestos, and yes I have read the forums. 75% of the manifestos are change and addition suggestions. The remaining 25% are general descriptions of why the AI is not strong enough. General descriptions are very difficult to reproduce. I need specifics.

The following information should be in bug reports:
1. Version of the Game
2. Type of game you're playing - Single Player, Multi Player, Hotseat, TCP/IP.
3. Section of the game - Movement, Combat, Install, Purchasing, AI, etc.
4. Detailed Description
5. Why you feel this is incorrect behavior.
6. Steps to reproduce
7. Savegame
8. Screenshots
9. Debug Log

Obviously, you can't provide all of the preceeding information in every case. But savegames and screenshots are very important. AI actions often develop over several turns. I need to be able to see what the player is doing, and how the AI is reacting to it. AI behavior is strongly dictated by the player's actions. A different player will get a different reaction.

Aaron

And exactly what salary does this position pay?

Come on man,...we already paid for the game,...now you are asking us to do detailed work if we want you to finish what we paid for?

Just fix the game.

[Mike_T]

Originally Posted by Malfador Machinations

Hi All,

Yes, I have received the manifestos, and yes I have read the forums. 75% of the manifestos are change and addition suggestions. The remaining 25% are general descriptions of why the AI is not strong enough. General descriptions are very difficult to reproduce. I need specifics.

The following information should be in bug reports:
1. Version of the Game
2. Type of game you're playing - Single Player, Multi Player, Hotseat, TCP/IP.
3. Section of the game - Movement, Combat, Install, Purchasing, AI, etc.
4. Detailed Description
5. Why you feel this is incorrect behavior.
6. Steps to reproduce
7. Savegame
8. Screenshots
9. Debug Log

Obviously, you can't provide all of the preceeding information in every case. But savegames and screenshots are very important. AI actions often develop over several turns. I need to be able to see what the player is doing, and how the AI is reacting to it. AI behavior is strongly dictated by the player's actions. A different player will get a different reaction.

Aaron

Aaron

There seems to be a misunderstanding between you and the buyers of this game. Buyers expect a game to be a finished product that has been tested and which works properly. You seem to think that buyers should do the testing for you. I would be interested in what Shrapnel's expectations were.

Did you carry out proper testing before releasing the game to Shrapnel? Did you implement the testers' findings? Did you believe that the game as released was a properly finished product? Shouldn't you be apologising for the game's shortcomings, rather than asking buyers to suggest "improvements"?

And, Shrapnel - did you expect Aaron to deliver you a fully tested and completed game? Do you think that is what he gave you? Are you happy with the sales pitch for WS as it appears on your website?

Why is it so difficult for a supplier to accept responsibility for what they are selling? This isn't just a legal requirement - it helps to keep your customers happy - if that's important to you!

[spillblood]

Yeah, the things he wants us to do are professional betatesting, not the actions normal customers are encouraged to do. Start a new official betatesting phase and stop selling this game, I don't want to do this work, I'm a customer, not a betatester!

[ScottWAR]

Seems Shrapnel doesnt have anything else to say on the subject. I guess once they realized everyone here is just as fed up as I am they decided to go back to hoping silence works.

Seriously guys,......call the FTC and make a complaint. Enough complaints and the FTC will contact them and they will actually do something,...even if its refunding our money.

Its time to quit complaining, and just taking it,...its time to do something.

[Mike_T]

Originally Posted by Mike_T

Aaron

There seems to be a misunderstanding between you and the buyers of this game. Buyers expect a game to be a finished product that has been tested and which works properly. You seem to think that buyers should do the testing for you. I would be interested in what Shrapnel's expectations were.

Did you carry out proper testing before releasing the game to Shrapnel? Did you implement the testers' findings? Did you believe that the game as released was a properly finished product? Shouldn't you be apologising for the game's shortcomings, rather than asking buyers to suggest "improvements"?

And, Shrapnel - did you expect Aaron to deliver you a fully tested and completed game? Do you think that is what he gave you? Are you happy with the sales pitch for WS as it appears on your website?

Why is it so difficult for a supplier to accept responsibility for what they are selling? This isn't just a legal requirement - it helps to keep your customers happy - if that's important to you!

Aaron and Shrapnel - these are simple relevant questions. Please give us some answers - don't ignore reasonable questions from your customers. This is not a hostile post - just an honest attempt to understand what's going on.