This would be in the "nearly impossible to find" area. From our research of this issue and talking to people, it's almost always people with home grown machines that they put in a one or two high powered GPUs.

Well while I've never actually heard of one before, an idealy equiped QA department would be testing on "home grown style" PCs as from a compatibility stand point it is important to simulate as many possible environments the game will be played in as possible. While it is a some what small population, it's not really that unusual for gamers to build their own high end PCs and thus this is an environment that should be tested in. In my experience though, QA departments rarely have the type of budgets needed to do such testing on high end machines which is why I said it would be a hard bug to find in QA.

As for how this is your bug, by my thinking if its your game making their comps crash then it is your bug, especially when other high end games don't seem to produce this result (note: this is my impression from the forum descriptions of the the problem and could of course be wrong as I do not have this problem). While I certainly wouldnt expect a turn based strategy game to need one, pretty much any graphicaly intensive game should have a frame rate throttle to avoid problems of this nature, especially one that doesnt have a poly limit.

With all that said I will repeat what I said before that this would be a hard bug to catch in QA and you guys were exceptionaly prompt on fixing it (to the point of offering an unofficial early patch for those reporting the problem) which I think deserves deffinite kudos. I've also seen far, far worse from other game releases.

Ok.. Alright..

Let's get some things straight..

A) I have played the game.. I'd say roughly about 15 hours thus far.. Granted that's not a hell of a lot.. but enough to warrant an opinion on the quality of the game..

I'm a gaming grognard.. My first pc game was back in the 80's.. Larry Bird vs. Dr. J.. on my Apple II C.. (God, remember that thing?) I've played Master of Orion 1, 2, and 3.. (3 sucked, by the way).. All the Civs.. 4 was by far the most impressive.. So I'm no stranger to turn based strategy games..

C) I'm not dissing the game.. It's a good game.. However, I'm am peturbed that game publishers rush games to the shelves before they are ready.. I'm peturbed with Stardock.. $40 isn't necessarily a lot of money.. but I'm paying for a game that's suppose to work.. without a ton of bugs.. Have I encountered a ton of them.. No not really.. I have dealt with one that's particularly annoying.. Where the memory disappears from my system and I get lack of memory messages, even after I quit the program.. That in itself is again not a big deal.. But when you use the public to essentially beta test your product.. That's BS.. Aside from MMO III, it's one of the buggiest games out of the gate I've seen in a long time.. I don't think the majority of these "bugs" can be passed off as compatability issues.. I for one have no problems in that area.. Again I'm noting the actual number of bugs being discovered..

D).. In conclusion, part of marketing is execution.. Having a great idea.. and hyping it up to the public is all well and good.. I just think so many game publishers out there rush a game to the shelves for one reason.. The bottom line..Without much thought for the gamer.. and in my humble opinion.. I think this game is a perfect example of it.. For Stardock .in particular) To say ..

Tandis Nearly every game released has a significant quantity of minor issues of one kind or another..

Is poor QA.. and bad business.. Might as well say.. "Too bad.. Tough luck.. Put up with it until we get around to fixing it".. It's a virus that's spreading through the gaming industry..Tandis, Frogboy.. Do you take these concerns personally? How professional is that? Reread your responses.. There's a tinge of annoyance and you're overly defensive.. No need for that.. We're all clients of your's.. and I'm stating some concerns that obviously some of us have.. Having been a gamer for 20+ years.. I think it's absurd that I should be paying to do beta testing.. We as gamers shouldn't put up with that.. It's become the status quo with many companies.. and if you just sit back and take it.. It won't ever change.. So.. Pardon my rant on my soapbox here.. but I think there are some out there who will be able to see my point.. and more importantly.. A few people in Stardock.. who will amend this "Too bad, Tough luck" approach..

I think it does feel like a beta in some regards.

But the only CTDs I get are when alt-tabbing out, sometimes when I tab back in it crashes.

The biggest problem I've run into is sometimes it autoscrolls by itself. I think if I click too many mouse buttons or something it happens. keeps doing it until i go to a screen without the map shown. Annoying! But not that major. And i ran into the missing turn button thing, which caused me to go back to an earlier save.

And the music cuts in and out. And sometimes the combat viewer is used, sometimes not. Minor stuff, mostly.

It may be poor QA on the whole, but it's not bad business. You're playing a game, not saving lives, or even working on an important document - this makes bugs less important. What you're seeing in buggy products recently is the result of the internet and adaptation to the real world conditions. Ultimately you can make a better, more featured game if you can take some of the extensive resources poured into QA and instead offload that work onto the eager player base.

You can, of course, vote with your wallet. But you should know that every time you buy an IDE or SATA drive instead of a SCSI drive you're voting for less QA - which is in your system? Most products are this way - consumers love to buy the cheapest things they can find, and then complain about how they break afterwards, or don't work as well as the top of the line. Would you pay $250 for a fully tested, bug free version?

Memory "disappearing" from your system is probably just your own misinterpretation of what's happening. When you exit a process, freeing the memory associated with the process is a job of the Operating System. I'd wager your OS doesn't have a bug here, since it would be pretty noticable and widespread, so you probably just need to wait a bit and let the windows garbage collection do its thing. If you're actually getting 'out of memory' errors it'll probably take 10-15 minutes, since that means you're also out of swap.

Most of the people coming here (or to any internet forum for any game) ranting about performance are victims of their own ignorance. You think your know how your computer works, but you don't, and when something doesn't work the way you want it to you immediately begin pointing fingers everywhere but yourself. Run a performance monitor recording the virtual and physical memory free in your system as you play the game. When you exit, let it continue to run for 15 minutes after the game exits without starting any other applications. Save it and provide a link to it. This is somewhat credible evidence. Logging in to a forum and posting that the game obvious fails to release memory without providing anything other than your say-so isn't going to stand up.

And yes, I'm annoyed by your 'gosh, why dont you guys just be perfect' attitude. I have no relation to StarDock, but I do understand the complexity of these programs that are made entirely for your entertainment, and the labor that the developers put into it primary out of the desire to create a great work. Your implications that anyone can just choose to make a bug free program is insulting, more so considering many of these folks probably worked 60+ hour weeks leading up to release, and undoubtedly fixed many bugs more serious than the ones you're nitpicking over. It's damn depressing to work your hardest, get 99% there, and have some 'professional game player' come along and point out the 1% that's not done and call the whole thing crap because of it.

I happen to agree with Stpinmass on a broad conceptual level. If you compare the PC and console market you'll notice that console games have far fewer bugs on release than your average PC game (and yes I know console games are sometimes released with bugs and in a few cases they can be somewhat severe but it still doesnt happen at anywhere near the frequency it happens with PC games). I think PC game developers and publishers too easily fall back on the "we can just patch this later" mentality.

Now in regards to specificaly applying this to Stardock, I think perhaps there are much better targets for your wrath. Not only were the bugs relatively minimal upon release but Stardock seems to be providing a level of customer service unheard of for PC game developers. Not only are the patches prompt but I don't think I have ever talked in a game forum where the AI programer (as well as a few other individuals whos positions I'm unsure of) has responded directly to what I have said.

I will take a moment though to suggest that the developers have been oddly quiet about the bug/feature of the unused social spending not rerouting back to your treasury as it says it should in the manual. I would really just like to know if this is a bug or a feature. Of course they could have said something about this already and I just missed it but i do tend to check the forums fairly often and it seems like every day I see an active post discussing this topic.

And, as a follow up.. here's what every game developer wishes to reply to comments phrased like this...
Link

I feel for stardock about these issues since they must be very hard to spot. Some games have more of these "bugs" that slip by QA without notice, some of the games have fewer.

What I want to point out is the quick action stardock took to fix these issues. I mean it took 3 days to get the first major issue fixed how long it took with Civ4? It took a month and then another month to come by with a second patch. I think we are in good hands here when it comes to support.

Lol Citizen Rhadman , that link is pure Gold

Hey Rhadman..

Quite an astute observation..

I am playing a game.. Good point.. an no.. I'm not saving lives.. However.. If you buy pay $40 for a filet mignon.. and it comes out well done when you ordered it rare.. Do you not complain? or are you just complacent.. and sit there and eat it.. Whether or not Stardock has the resources to put into testing the game, or for proper QA.. is not the customers problem, burden or responsibility.. They advertised that the game would do a, b, c.. Would I have bought the game.. if I knew it had 100's of bugs.. no.. I wouldn't.. Would I have bought it if I knew I'd be beta testing it? No.. I wouldn't have..

Your argument about IDE vs. SATA is ridiculous.. Most products that are priced the same as top end products of their type are laden with 100's of problems? Umm.. I think not.. If anything, saying SCSI is a better drive, must mean you've never used one.. They're a pain in the ass in regards to compatibility.. More expensive doesn't necessarily equate into a better product.. And since when does a game cost $250? If the top games cost that.. Your point would be valid.. But they don't!

Ahhh.. now for you "memory disappearing" observation.. You're absolutely right.. When I run graphic intensive games.. like Fable.. Quake 4.. Fear.. etc.. and run into no problems.. Games which are much more taxing on my system.. but I experience none of the problems I experience with Gal Civ.. You're right.. I must be misinterpreting what's actually happening.. Since when are we ok with getting "out of memory" popups after quitting a program.. I'm not the only one having the problem.. You would know that if you read the forum..

You're saying I'm complaining about performance.. Ummm.. I don't recall doing that.. and if you're comprehension levels were a bit more up to snuff.. You would have realized I was addressing the number of bugs discovered in the game.. and not complaining, as you so put it.. about my own computer's performance with the game.. You're correct in saying that if I post that only I am experiencing this problem.. it won't fly.. But, numerous people have had this issue.. along with 100's of others.. So if you're going to make a point.. Please make it pertain to what's actually being discussed in the thread.. Not just typing so you can see your name up in the big white print..

So you're annoyed at my "Guys be perfect" comment? Did you read a different post? I don't recall ever typing that.. In lieu of insulting you again.. I have one question for you Rhadman.. and everyone else can respond to this question as well..

WHY DON'T CONSOLE GAMES GET RELEASED WITH 100'S OF BUGS?

You know why Rhadman? Because they can't.. They can't be patched.. So guess what? The company releasing them, if they want to have a fighting chance.. Has to invest in doing their own testing prior to release.. and guess what? They work 60+ hour weeks too! Imagine that!

And, as a follow up.. here's what every gamer wishes to reply to comments phrased like Rhadman's..

http://webdeveloper.earthweb.com/webjs/article.php/934901

We had a public beta for several months.  We had private gammas.  The game is rock solid on our QA boxes and our test boxes.  It's very solid for most players (>95%). 

I really get a bit peeved when I hear people say "it was rushed to market".  GalCiv II was definitely not rushed to market.  Stardock doesn't need the sales from the game.  If GalCiv sold 0 copies, Stardock would still be running in the black.  So to say that it was "rushed to market" is troubling.

It's easy for someone to sit back and say "Oh, how could they not have caught bug X."  Well, first off, bug X may only affect 1 out of 100 people.  I woudl venture our compatibility lab is up there with the big guys since we have to use it for testing our utility software that has to run on crazy stuff.

Yes, it's annoying when some problem happens -- to you.  That is why we are here, to listen to what you hear and address them as quickly as we can.  But to compare us to consoles is absurd.  Consoles  = 1 hardware platform. 

And, incidentally, some of the naysayers here should spend some time in the forums of other games or heck, even some of the console maker forums.  The Xbox 360 had its share of issues as well. Games locking up, crashing, etc. Why? Overheating and that's where Microsoft controls the entire platform.

There are only so many configurations we can test on and the fact that the forums are relatively clear of serious bug report problems relative to the sheer volume of unit sales I think demonstrates that there really aren't very many significant issues.

And for those people who have, what more do you want? We've put in 80+ hour weeks recording people's issues. Hanging out on IRC, testing out saved games, etc.  And within a week of widespread retail availability, it appears we have solved nearly all those issues.

It's hard enough to make a game this complex that runs on its own under normal circumstances.  But it's impossible to make a game that will be perfect on every single person's computer regardless of their hardware, case issues, laptop configuratons, heating issues, video driver issues, sound card issues, etc.

And another thing to consider: Of the bug reports you've seen posted here? We track them as you probably knwo.  2 out of every 3 "random CTD" issues we get end up being someone with 2+ year old drivers even though this is documented.  Or do you think this is our fault too?

Our friends at Firaxis had a huge beta too.  And what happened? They released Civ IV and it didn't run on most (>50%) of ATI cards on the market initially due to a memory mapping issue in the ATI driver.  Is this Firaxis's fault that ATI changed driver capabilities seemingly at random? I don't think ti is.  But there was still a riot when the game was released.

And there's nothing even remotely comparable here to that. I agree and feel for those people who do have problems.  By this weekend, it should be a thing of the past. 

Maybe I'm just incompotent but it did not occur to us to be sitting around monitoring GPU temperatures during the beta. You can bet we will in the future.

Thanks for that link, Rhadman, had me rolling.

Good stuff.

A few more commentaries for good measure..

http://www.the-underdogs.org/scratch.php

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/profile/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=24032317&user=Atomic_Mutant

http://dubiousquality.blogspot.com/2005/06/game-financing.html

just add the _blog portion to your link window, for the Gamespot article..

Frogboy..

I'm not bashing the game.. and if you read my first thread.. I said I admire Stardocks commitment to patching and addressing issues.. However, it doesn't excuse finding 100's of gaming issues.. which are bugs! These aren't compatability issues.. Let's get that straight.. 100's.. not a few.. You'll never be able to release a game for the PC that is 100% compatable.. I understand that.. That's not my point.. But Stardock, no matter how you cut it.. released a buggy program.. with bugs that affect gameplay.. not performance.. Again.. I'm just using this as a soapbox.. to express my point.. I like the game a lot.. I'm sure you guys worked your ass off.. but it should do what it's been advertised to do.. and do the things the manual says it will do.. Reread curttasker's post.. That's a lot of damn bugs that don't pertain to performance.. Or perhaps because you guys busted your asses.. That's allowable.. I assure you.. It's not!

eh hem...*cough* *cough* *clears throat* *gets on top of grassy knoll* *stares Stpinmass down and points finger accusingly*............ TROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL TROLLLLLL TROLLLLL...... *whew* *huff*......*breaths in deeply*.... TRROOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLL TROLLLLLLLLLLLL TROOOOOOOOOOLLLLLL ......

WARNING: do not feed the trolls

Bravo, Brad.

T

WHY DON'T CONSOLE GAMES GET RELEASED WITH 100'S OF BUGS?

Sorry, just want to add one thing. While it's true that many console games have fewer bugs due to the fact that they can't be patched.. Console games also run on one system and one system only.

They don't have to worry about what OS, the language of OS, the hardware performance, etc.

They have one system and they just have to make sure that it works within that system.

PC games, onthe other hand, have other problems to deal with. The game might be 100% free on the 10 OS and 100 hardware configuration they tested. That doesn't mean the game will run completely bug free for the thousands if not millions of different system out there. If there are only a hundred bugs from a thousand system, that's quite a feat.

With that said, I have to agree that a lot of pc games just use patch to fix the games.

For me, the population and social production problem seems like a problem that shouldn't sneak into the official release. That made it seem like a beta. Then again, I am slightly happy that the game feels a bit like beta. It is not because i'm masochistic and want to be over-run by bugs. I feel like I'm in a beta because players' opinions are heard and new features are added. What I don't like about what you said is how you keep using the 100's of bugs from curttasker's list against stardock when in fact, many of the 'bugs' are suggestions and preference issues.

Just like different computer configuration might lead to different problems, different players also have different ideas about how a certain aspect of the game should work. They might suggest stardocks to change some game feature even though the rest of the players would hate that change. The suggestions/annoyances represent the different images people have about what their ideal game should be like. Granted, galciv2 will not be the ideal game for everyone.. but it is working its way to be a good if not great game for everyone.

So i'm sorry to hear that you are not satisfied with the game.. but keep in mind that this might be one of the few game where the game play will get better and better (not because bugs are fixed) without you needing to fork out another 40 bucks for an expansion. If you dislike this game so much that you wouldn't want to play anymore, so be it. Though perhaps you should give it another chance and come back in a few weeks and see if the game surprises you with additional content.

Yes, it's annoying when some problem happens -- to you. That is why we are here, to listen to what you hear and address them as quickly as we can. But to compare us to consoles is absurd. Consoles = 1 hardware platform.

I agree that comparing hardware issues between consoles and PCs would be absurd. What I was refering to (and did not make clear) was issues outside of this context such as typos or game play issues.

Maybe I'm just incompotent but it did not occur to us to be sitting around monitoring GPU temperatures during the beta. You can bet we will in the future.

As the person in this thread who has been talking about the over heat problem I feel like I need to say that I certainly dont think anybody on the stardock staff is incompotent because of this issue and doubt really very many other people do either. It's really just one of those oddball issues that you just don't think about. The only reason i mentioned it at all was I fealt Tandis was incorrect in his statement about no priority 1 bugs being in the release and I'm nitpicky about stuff like that. Do I think Stardock is a bunch of inhuman monsters for not picking up on an oddball issue like this one. absolutly not.

I just think Stardock is a bunch of inhuman monsters for making a game that is eating up so much of my free time

Stpinmass dude, what's with all the periods? Seriously man, it's like you have OCD.

I would just like to say that I am wholly impressed with the quality of GalCiv2. It has the least amount of bugs of any game released that I have played in years. If you would like to see a game that was rushed out, pick up Civ 4 (wouldn't run on mine nor my roomates, nor a friend's machine until 2 patches later). Or even Battlefield 2, which many people still have problems with. Or Star Wars Galaxies. (Yeah that link that Rhadman posted was hilarious and all, but seriously, that game has issues, not everybody complaining about bugs wr0te l1ke th1s!!!111!!!!one!!!, and I know many people who made very reasonable pleas on the forums to fix the major gamebreaking bugs, and a few of them to this day still exist, after 2 1/2 years.

Stardock has been outstanding in the way they have handled the release of GC and GC2, and I am thoroughly impressed by their customer service. Sony Online's CS is a nightmare, and I've dealt with it for 2 years now. I refuse to play another SOE game (I know, it's an MMORPG, but still their CS was terrible). I feel I have been spoiled by Stardock since I bought GC1, they have a loyal customer for life here now.

I'm sorry your computer can't handle this game but plays every other game just fine. There is probably some fluke with some piece of hardware in your computer. Happened to me with a game a couple years back. Every game worked just fine, cept one. All I did was change out a RAM chip (not to address the problem specifically, as I was just upgrading anyway) and the game worked beautifully after that. Never know what is going to stress what piece of hardware until something does.

And to address your comment about console games being bug free - well console developers are working with one hardware set, and it is much easier to code around one hardware set than the litterally millions of hardware combinations out there in PCs today (especially the big differences like ATI/nVidia, Windows 2k/XP, Intel/AMD, etc). If you actually read some of these response rather than repeating yourself, that would be great. Stardock is doing an excellent job, please direct your venom elsewhere. Thanks.

Obviously this troll has no idea what a test plan or test schedule is.

I've seen the beta test plans that the folks at SD listed out ages ago when GalCiv 2 beta developement had started to kick in and ppl were invited to test. IMHO, it was one of the more *open and thought-out* software testing document I seen. I been in other betas (from A-title developers and publishers) before and *none* had that sort of detail.

Sadly I didn't participate because of my work commitments, but coming from a software and hardware test background, I know what the folks at SD were up against. And all that in a very tight schedule too. /respect!

To the folks at SD, don't let these trolls worry you. You guys have done a great job; sure the game's has issues, but the fact that SD responded and were FAST to respond and were open about it, means that our game is in good hands.

Keep up the good work StarDock.

I find this funny:
stpinmass loves Civ 4
That game was even more buggy at the release then GalCiv II
And GalCiv II fixed it after three days my problems, Civ 4 memory problem took a long time!
It still gives me CTD's. I don't have that with GalCiv II.

Hmmm, I wouldn't say GC2 has a lot of bugs, no way, but I would say it lacks polish. And polish is a helluva lot different than bugs. I mean unless you are one of the very few getting CTDs or overheating the game probably works fine and that is great.

However, it doesn't excuse finding 100's of gaming issues.. which are bugs!

Errr, this is where you are flat out wrong. A bug impairs the softwares functionality, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_bug (omg bad forum, just look up bug in wikipedia.org) . You are talking about minor bugs and stuff that falls under the polish category. An example of a bug would be like in MoO3 when the AI would build 90% transports then send them to a planet and recall them one turn before they got to the destination and repeat.

I would say that GC2 is right smack at average with the release of video games made for the PC. If you have played so many strategy games like you have said then you would know this as well. I remember plenty of exploits in the original Sim City, X-Com, and MoO2 dunno what you are talking about.

If you have ever played EE2, MoO3 or Sacred you would know what a buggy game is. GC2 is NOT a buggy game. Does it smell a bit rushed and unpolished? Yeah, sure but so does every game when it is first released. Hell did you know that BF2 didn't launch with a buddy list and that game is 100% MP or that Guildwars opened their virtual doors 2 days after people had the game or the massive server crashes in WoW? Those are bugs, but small gameplay issues are nothing to go "OMG THE SUZZOR BUGS RUINZ THE GAMORS!!!"

Just to repeat myself once last time so you get the point: GC2 is no more buggy than the average newly released PC game. If you want a game to have few bugs you should really wait until 1-2 months after it's release and a few patches are out, but you should already know that.

Well I guess I should chime in as well.

FIRST ABOUT THE CONSOLE STATEMENT: Someone above made a comment about how PC game programmers must be just taking it easy and slacking... more or less. That is not an exact quote but, it is the gist of it. FIRST: A console is ALWAYS the same whether it is in your house, my house, or someone elses house. It has the same graphics, same sound, same motherboard, same operating system. So, when a game developer makes a game for a console if it works on their test system then it will work on every console. This is not the case with PCs. There are literally infinite combinations of hardware possible. There is no feasible way for them to test it on all of them so, even the most bug free game on a PC will hit machines it will not work on. This is why patching is needed. However, a lot of companies add new features and such when they patch a PC game as well. I expect this company will do the same.

GAMES IN THIS DAY AND AGE: I have become a try before I buy type of person now. There is a lot of crap being released and a lot of it is mainstream. I no longer can afford to pay $50 to try out all the games coming out today. The majority of them are pretty poor IMHO. They may have great graphics but, they have crappy game play. I read about this game while I was downloading a WAREZ/PIRATED copy. I was impressed enough by the creators not using DRM and other stupid protection methods and the general attitude of the developers that I canceled that download about 50% into it. I then went and purchased a copy and downloaded it and hope the CD will arrive sooner or later. I support developers who innovate and who support their customers. Now, if I had downloaded it as a WAREZ and played it and liked it (got more than a days fun before getting bored) then I would turn around and purchase it. That is the only safe way to do it for me these days.

AS TO BUGS: This game should actually avoid some bugs other games have due to not having any copy protection. Securerom, and safedisc often cause all kinds of problems on various hardware. So, I think the model stardock is doing is going in the correct direction. I may even see if I can eventually have them publish something for me.

TO THOSE OF YOU WHO DID DOWNLOAD IT AS WAREZ/TORRENT: This game uses the serial number to connect to the servers and update the game. If you are using a downloaded version as I almost did then you are not running the latest version because, they have already made updates. So, if you are using a pirated version then of course it is buggy... you don't have the latest bug fixes. If you like what you see so far then go buy the game. This is an INDIE developer and they really have to struggle to produce games. So, when they put out something of this quality we need to show them our support.

TO THE REST OF YOU: If you are having bugs and problems. Give them a bit to address the hardware/software related problems that happen with ALL new PC games. I am sure they will get it fixed.

BUGS I HAVE SEEN: I run dual monitors.... AMD Athlon XP 3000+, Geforce TI4200, SB Live, 1GB RAM. I locked up one of my monitors (with the game screen) when I launched the game in FULL SCREEN mode while watching a DIVX play back of a star trek episode on my other monitor. So, it is not really a tragedy that it crashed. I then set it to windowed mode and tried it and it didn't like it either. Of course. I do not consider this really a bug. It was more curiosity to see if it could handle it. I've gotten used to playing Space Empires IV while watching things. That game uses a lot less resources though so, I did not expect the same performance here.

OBSERVATION: If I play the game for quite a while (I have not completed a game yet) and quit out it takes quite awhile for memory to be freed up and my desktop to respond again. The way the hard drive is spinning up I am certain it is using a substantial amount of virtual memory. This tends to be worse as time goes on (Longer played). I suspect there may be some MEMORY LEAKS They need to track down. I haven't tried to isolate this fact but, the way it behaves when the game is exited and the reports some people are describing for crashing can be tied to memory leaks.

OVERALL: This game is from an INDIE developer and it is in better shape than many HUGE BUDGET / HUGE TEAM developing houses games that have been released. Overall, it is more bug free than a lot of high profile titles. I expect if you work with these developers they will be able to address and fix the problems you are encountering. It is a waste of all of our time for you to argue that it should be like on consoles... simply not possible. That is the appeal of consoles. Developers can make their games.... if they work... they work for everyone. I personally prefer PC games but, this is a reality that MUST be faced and understood. PC Development is much more complex in development than a console simply due to all the different permutations of computers out there.

Allow me to retort.

You didn't pay $40 for a filet mignon, you paid $2 for a hamburger, when it arrived you demanded it should have been filet mignon. The restaurant doesn't even serve filet, because no one would buy from McDonalds, thus the option for that kind of product has been driven out of this portion of the market.

I'm not sure when the last time you used a SCSI drive was - probably about a decade ago based on the compatibility claims. SCSI drives most definately have a lower failure rate than IDE drives. The reason why SCSI drives continue to exist is because corporations, which have liability, demand the increased reliability and performance of these drives, and are thus far willing to subsidize the production by paying a significant premium. If there were no difference, the more expensive drives wouldn't be bought, they would cease to be profitable to manufacture, and then they would cease to be available. This is about what's happened in the game industry - features are valued far more than stability, and so the market will drive out the products made with features compromised to allow for stability. The top end games don't cost $250, but productivity software (where stability is still valued) does. How do you think the size of the development team between MS Office and a modern PC game compares?

And yes, if you think running a test under inherently different conditions and not having the same problem is proof, then you are greatly misinterpretting the situation. You might notice that this is the first game you've run that has had a problem. It won't be your last. Out of memory is a performance problem btw - you ran out ram - you're basically saying the game should handle memory usage better. That falls under performance.

Numerous people have had this issue, probably numerous people with not enough ram in their systems. I feel pretty safe in this guess. There really is a lot more going on in a computer system than most people are aware of. Do you think that this memory error happens to everyone and they just released in anyway? Do you think it happened to them at all and they just marked it down as acceptable? Perhaps if you think about it this way: Have you ever had or known of anyone who's had an allergic reaction to a drug? Many people have allergic reactions to drugs, but just because you and a thousand other people have such a reaction to one drug and don't have a reaction to another drug doesn't mean that the drug you do have a reaction to is defective. It's interaction of very complex systems, and as time goes on these systems only get more and more complex.

Why don't console games get released with 100s of bugs? Because there is exactly 1 system configuration developers need to worry about on consoles. All Xbox systems have the same amount of ram. All systems have the same video processor, the same main processor, and the same everything else. You can actually test your product on the exact same system that your customers will be playing on. Do you know how many different AMD and Intel CPUs are available and in use now? Multiply that times the number of different motherboards, and video cards, and ram sizes, and there's even a handful of Operating Systems, and drivers, and other sofware that likes to poke it's nose in. And let's not stop at things that are actually logically in the system, if your case doesn't have enough airflow, or you play in a hot room your video card might overheat.

Why do they have only one configuration? Partially because they dont want 100s of bugs. (The bigger reason is because they want to know that all games will perform as well on all systems). And they don't want 100s of bugs because they can't patch. They don't have 100s of bugs because they engineered the whole system - including hardwre design, sales and marketing - to avoid that. Game developers for the PC don't have that luxury, there are too many factors out of their control.

What you do have that console games don't have is actual conversation with the developers. You not only have a patch mechanism here, but you have a way to report your problems. You can cause things to be fixed about the game that console titles wont even consider as a bug. The AI is stupid? On a console that's something you will have to live with, in this game it can be updated. You also get the ability to mod the game, to add your own content. This freedom has a price in complexity, and that results in more bugs. If you prefer fewer bugs to this freedom, then you should definately stick to console titles.

I appologize for coming in with a rant from left field previously. My background is in MMO games, which are even more 'beta' than normal PC games now. These games accept even more bugs in order to provide content that is constantly being updated. It's not that the developer can sit down and click a button that says 'fix bugs' or 'dont fix bugs', it's that they have a certain budget, certain goals that must be met, certain flexible goals, and people - just real people, not robots - to work with. You don't see the costs for these decisions which seem like no-brainers. It's quite easy to see the company as some entity to itself. The reality is that you're interacting with the people that actually do (try to) take pride in the work they do, and when you launch a tirade like this it has an effect on those people. It's hard to respond to a post in that situation with any civility, and yet there's an expectation to not only do it civil, but to avoid showing any defensiveness. The danger here is that too many of these posts where the devs are expected to show no emotion while being baited with imflamatory language will result in the devs not responding at all, and that will be a loss for everyone.

Oops, a little forum slowdown and it seems all the points have been covered in a less aggrivated manner than I can manage to put them at the moment I'll cut my rambling short(er).

Perhaps if you think about it this way: Have you ever had or known of anyone who's had an allergic reaction to a drug? Many people have allergic reactions to drugs, but just because you and a thousand other people have such a reaction to one drug and don't have a reaction to another drug doesn't mean that the drug you do have a reaction to is defective. It's interaction of very complex systems, and as time goes on these systems only get more and more complex.

Why don't console games get released with 100s of bugs? Because there is exactly 1 system configuration developers need to worry about on consoles. All Xbox systems have the same amount of ram. All systems have the same video processor, the same main processor, and the same everything else. You can actually test your product on the exact same system that your customers will be playing on. Do you know how many different AMD and Intel CPUs are available and in use now? Multiply that times the number of different motherboards, and video cards, and ram sizes, and there's even a handful of Operating Systems, and drivers, and other sofware that likes to poke it's nose in. And let's not stop at things that are actually logically in the system, if your case doesn't have enough airflow, or you play in a hot room your video card might overheat.

Why do they have only one configuration? Partially because they dont want 100s of bugs. (At least as big of a reason is because they want to know that all games will perform as well on all systems). And they don't want 100s of bugs because they can't patch. They don't have 100s of bugs because they engineered the whole system - including hardwre design, sales and marketing - to avoid that. Game developers for the PC don't have that luxury, there are too many factors out of their control.

What you do have that console games don't have is actual conversation with the developers. You not only have a patch mechanism here, but you have a way to report your problems. You can cause things to be fixed about the game that console titles wont even consider as a bug. The AI is stupid? On a console that's something you will have to live with, in this game it can be updated. You also get the ability to mod the game, to add your own content. This freedom has a price in complexity, and that results in more bugs. If you prefer fewer bugs to this freedom, then you should definately stick to console titles.

I appologize for coming in with a rant from left field previously. My background is in MMO games, which are even more 'beta' than normal PC games now. These games accept even more bugs in order to provide content that is constantly being updated. It's not that the developer can sit down and click a button that says 'fix bugs' or 'dont fix bugs', it's that they have a certain budget, certain goals that must be met, certain flexible goals, and people - just real people, not robots - to work with. You don't see the costs for these decisions which seem like no-brainers. It's quite easy to see the company as some entity to itself. The reality is that you're interacting with the people that actually do (try to) take pride in the work they do, and when you launch a tirade like this it has an effect on those people. It's hard to respond to a post in that situation with any civility, and yet there's an expectation to not only do it civil, but to avoid showing any defensiveness. The danger here is that too many of these posts where the devs are expected to show no emotion while being baited with imflamatory language will result in the devs not responding at all, and that will be a loss for everyone.

Heh. I am long winded... have more to say. (Hey look at that I like to use lots of periods too... I don't know why but, I must have OCD... whatever that means? )

EMPIRE EARTH 2: Buggy as hell. They raved about how moddable it would be. I actually released the first mod for that game released in the world. I wrote a lot of the initial documents about how to mod it. Myself and a few others figured it out. The developer did not help. They released a patch. It broke the mods. They didn't answer questions by modders. Only by the "elite" RTS players. They certainly did not fix bugs within a few days like Stardock. Eventually, I became so disillusioned by Mad Doc with EE2 that I uninstalled it and have not gone back since. I still get people asking me to mod things for it but, I lost interest due to lack of support. This is stated simply to put things in perspective. The fact that the developer is HERE talking to us and fixing things is RARE and wonderful. The developer is not insolated behind 3 tiers of customer service and public relations people who cannot answer technical questions. That is the reality of a big name title. We are talking to the developers!! They answer! They care!

NEVERWINTER NIGHTS: I consider to be probably the best game ever made. Why? The toolset is awesome and easy to use. Bioware listened to users. They fixed bugs. The developers talk to people. Stardock is just as impressive. Just much smaller. They are INDIE and need our support. I have spent a lot of time making stuff for Neverwinter Nights. The community is awesome and the support is good. I am actually in the hall of fame for a script and a module... Script is called NPC ACTIVITIES and is a tool of sorts I made for other people. The module is an RTS and RPG hybrid called RTS - Harvest of Souls and is pretty unique and addictive once you get past the learning curve. I may do the same with GalCiv2. How much I mod GalCiv2 depends on how much we can mod. I really would have liked to write AI programs for it. I don't know if that is possible.... but, who knows with a patch it may be later.

BUGS: And things I have done in the past.
When the original DUNGEON SIEGE Came out I bought 2 copies, and 4 friends drove 5 hours one way to play it with us... Out of the 6 people playing. MY machine crashed over and over again. Everyone else worked great. I had not had any problems with the machine with other games. Just Dungeon Siege. I spent that weekend working on my machine and was very angry. By the time my friends left I found I could set the BIOS settings of my motherboard to CONSERVATIVE and it would work. Eventually I used a free memory testing program called DOCMEMORY which I made a bootable CD for. My machine passed ALL memory tests until it hit the BURST memory test. Then it failed every time. All I could determine is that DS must have been using a similar memory mode while other games were not. It was a MEMORY Issue that ONLY effected DUNGEON SIEGE.

Furthermore, in this day and age there are other considerations than simply your drivers. Spyware is rampant and you do not want to use just any spyware removal program you find since, many of those put spyware on your machine. I recommend SPYBOT SEARCH & DESTROY And AD-Aware Personal SE. They are both free and you should periodically run them both. EVERYONE Gets spyware. I find it is actually worse in most cases these days than VIRUSES.

When you have other programs running in the background if they were not tested on EVERY permutation of computer out there they can end up Being bullies and NOT PLAYING NICE WIth other programs. So, it is possible something you have running on your computer either intentionally or without your knowledge could cause problems for you with GalCiv2 or any other game without apparent reason. So, if most people are running the game okay then try these things. Some of these are mentioned in most FAQs for troubleshooting games... others are not. This can hopefully narrow down and fix your problems. I am going to list it in a different order than most sites do because, some steps can solve your problem while others can introduce them.
STEP #1: if you're running Windows XP - Set a RESTORE POINT by clicking on START | ALL PROGRAMS | ACCESSORIES | SYSTEM TOOLS | System Restore. Give the restore point a name you will recognize like BEFORE I STARTED MESSING WITH THINGS. This will give you a fall back point if anything should go wrong.
STEP #2: Delete your TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES (TOOLS | OPTIONS In Internet Explorer... or INTERNET OPTIONS in the Control Panel).
STEP #3: Download SPYBOT SEARCH & DESTROY... when it runs and askes if you want to check for updates say yes. Always use the latest info. Go ahead and use the program and see what it finds. Click Here
Link
STEP #4: Download Ad-Aware Personal SE and do the same with it that you did with Spybot S&D. Click Here
Link
STEP #5: Reboot your machine and see if the problems are gone. If they are not then proceed to step #6.
STEP #6: Go to the manufacturer for your Motherboard, Video Card, and Sound Card and make sure your drivers are all the latest versions. DO NOT SKIP DOING THIS! You'd be surprised how many people say their drivers are up to date and then when they send in a dxdiag dump of their system specs they are still running old drivers. This could fix your problem and if it is a driver issue then it is not a bug for Stardock! So, be sure to do this. If you do not know how to find the latest drivers then ask someone here and I am sure we can help you.
STEP #7: Install the drivers you downloaded in step #6. Reboot your machine. Test to see if the problem is resolved. If the problem is not solved then proceed to step #8.
STEP #8: Get a dump of your DXDIAG information. You do this by the following steps. Click on START. Click on RUN And type in DXDIAG. Click OKAY. Click on the DirectX Files tab. Click SAVE ALL INFORMATION Button. Give the file a name you will remember. This is a text file you can email to Stardock or someone with your machine specs, driver information, etc. This is handy information to have before we try some more things.
STEP #9: It could be an obscure memory problem like I provided an example for with Dungeon Siege up above. So, go to this site Link and get yourself a copy of DocMemory. If you have problems with this let me know and I'll see about making my bootable CD into an ISO and providing a link. Run the program in Quick Test mode. If it reports any problems then you have a memory problem. If you do have a memory problem then proceed to step #10. Otherwise, it could be something else so have the data file from Step #8 ready and contact Stardock with as much information as you can provide them to help them narrow down what triggers the bug and what happens...
STEP #10: So, you have memory problems. Well, everything this point and on assumes you are fairly comfortable mucking around with your machine. Go ahead and go into the BIOS of your machine and if you are running the motherboard with more aggressive settings try reducing them a bit. Try reducing especially anything to do with memory timings. Then use the DocMemory again and see if the problem goes away. If it does then try GalCiv2 and see if it works properly now. If the memory problem still exists proceed to step #11.
STEP #11: Final memory suggestion. If you only have a single memory chip and do not have another to swap it out with to test it then there is nothing that can be done here. Using Docmemory power down your machine and swap out memory chips one at a time and run the memory test. You should be able to narrow down which memory chip is faulty and if you have a spare be up and running in no time.

That is my suggestions. I just wrote them off the top of my head for this forum. If it helps some people. Great!! If your bug is actually polish or balance type issues then those should be easy to remedy in the future. I know from working with EE2 that everyone has their own perceptions on how they think things should be balanced... and you can't please them all. My EE2 mod was a rebalance of all the units and a rescaling of all the units so the infantry and such were actually the same size as the doors to the buildings. Some people loved it.... Some people hated it. So, if you are calling those types of things "bugs" then you are mistaken. It should be expected some people will be unhappy with how things are balanced. Especially, when the game is getting rave reviews and thus, attracting a lot of people. You definately cannot please everyone.