Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2422

More GalCiv II reviews and observations

Other perspectives

Game reviews keep coming in. Here are a few that caught our eye:

FiringSquad is one of the sites I go to to check out whether a game is good or not. We held our breath to hear what they thought of GalCiv II. You can see their review here.

James Allen is a well known gaming blogger. He's a one man review machine. You can see his review here. Incidentally, we're interested in hearing about any blogger reviews. So let us know if you see them.

Eurogamer's review is up. I tend to like Eurogamer's review and agree with much of it but their rating (8/10) was a bit of a bummer since it dropped our average down. And disagreed with some of it. But it was a very well done review IMO. You can read that here.

One thing that is a bummer about the game industry is that the way reviews are done discourages doing updates. Most of Stardock's business comes from utility software and magazines like PC Magazine and such will re-review our various products every year or so based on the current state even if those updates were free to customers.

By contrast, in the game industry, it's rare to see anyone take a look at doing a review of the same game but updated. Once in awhile an MMO will get a second look but that's about it.

So what game companies seem to do is only put bug fixes into their updates and then charge people for new features in an "expansion". I'm all for expansions, but putting in features based on user suggestions into free updates strikes me as good business -- makes people more likely to buy your next game.

So even as we take in suggestions and implement them in (look how much has already gone into 1.0X and we've been out just over a week and wait till you see the 1.1 list of new features) those improvements won't ever be recorded or looked at by reviewers.

I think that's one of the reasons why many game companies don't do updates. They don't get credit for doing them so they only put in bug fixes and charge for features. Stardock's always made games but our experience on the utility side of things has taught us that doing free updates that add new features pays off. But it would be nice if reviews took that into account.

Not that we're complaining, thee major game magazines have been kind to us. 9.0 from Gamespot. A- from UGO. 4.5/5 from GameSpy. But hopefully at some point we'll be able to talk them into looking at some future version of GalCiv II and see how much it's changed/improved based on the suggestions you guys -- our customers -- make.

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

id say tell that Eurogamer to rereview it 8 out of 10 what the heck?!?!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Most of the reviews coming out seem incredibly fair and well-written (a rarity amongst so-called game journalists) and I'm really looking forward to the aggregate score once enough independent reviews come in. I didn't base this particular purchase on a review, but it makes me feel good knowing you guys are getting the credit you deserve. Viva GalCiv seris!

Successfully updated karma reason!

Reviews Schmeviews! Your game rocks, and we (the fans) are all behind you! Go go stardock, keep making games we can enjoy !

Successfully updated karma reason!

The difference between what other companies and what you guys are doing is simple:
You have the duality of being a business but not being like a business at the front end.
What the ‘feel’ of this company is that it’s like you are our buddy, uncle, brother doing updates for the game that you made for us.
Other companies seem non-reachable, have delayed feedback, red-tape etc.
You are not some suited gods coldly plotting the next engine that will make their shareholders 2% more.

The above may sound a bit dumbed-down but in essence what you have done is to create your own unique niche in business practice by being not like a business with the buyers.
Updates? We have them. Two of them. Released within a week of the game being out.
‘When’s the next patch out?’.
Yesterday.
‘We never get any feedback from the company’.
We get feedback all the time. Journals, thoughts, updated info.
Thoughts. What a strange word to use, but yes – you are totally open with us. I can even smell the aroma of coffee as I read the entries online.

In my experience in the business, people will follow your work and support it if you support them. A game is ‘dead’ when there is no contact with the makers or support for it. Sure, there will be enthusiasts that carry the torch with mod sites and such but there is no substitute for the actual creator’s to be ‘live’ with their creation.

What we have here is an uncommon and wonderful symbiosis between the creators and us that surpasses mere bug feedback. You are actually listening, reading everything we say, taking note and really doing things with it.

Your philosophy with the whole picture works so don’t let 3rd-rate reviews phase you.

There is simply nothing out there that can touch GC2, not with the game, the concept, and certainly the effort, the empathy of you guys with us and your talent.

Keep on doing what you are doing and people will always buy your stuff because we know you listen.

Sure, some say things might not be finished.

What I say is that things are just starting.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm all for expansions, but putting in features based on user suggestions strikes me as good business -- makes people more likely to buy your next game.

Depends on the game. And the developer.

If you're making a strategy game, this is not an unreasonable proposition. However, you have to make sure that whatever changes get made don't interefer with the stated design goals and intensions of the game.

If you're making an adventure game, external input is not acceptable. Period. You have a designed vision of a product, and then you either deliver that vision or you don't. If you do deliver that vision, if they don't like it, tough.

I treat these kinds of games like movies. You shouldn't go back and update a movie just because you had some more ideas about how the movie should work (we all know what happened to the most famous example of this ideal). And that should be as it is with games.

From a developers point of view, I'd have to say that the reason that most developers don't do frequent updates is because they're too busy making new games. I, for one, couldn't imagine living with a certain kind of gameplay for 1.5 years or so, getting it finally finished, and then wanting to tweak it for the next .5 to 1 years later. Maybe it can be made a bit better, yes, but during that time, you're not actually making new gameplay. There's more ideas out there to be explored.

Granted, some developers have their genre expertise. Sid Meier lives within his genre of choice, as does Will Wright. Other game designers are capable of design in a wide variety of genres, like Shigeru Miyamoto.

That's not to say that the updating process is a bad idea. I'm simply suggesting that there are plenty of good reasons why the industry doesn't lean in that direction. The financial issue (the fact that you don't charge for updates) is only part of that.

Successfully updated karma reason!

http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=670758
This isn't that positive of a review.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Kazriko

Join Date 07/2004

+10

That site gets a rating of something like 1.4/5 from the main rankings site anyway.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'll say this. GC1 when I got it didn't impress me too much- then I went home and DLed your last patch before Altarian Prophecy. That changed my opinion of the game drastically (I had no internet for six months- due to being at Keesler's training hell)

Your patches got me to buy GC2 as a pre-order. I knew even if there were lots of bugs (honestly, there were a few more bugs then I expected) it would be handled, and improvements made.

I support companies that give me my money's worth- and I'm a picky customer.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Frogboy

Join Date 03/2001

+2422

Granted, some developers have their genre expertise. Sid Meier lives within his genre of choice, as does Will Wright. Other game designers are capable of design in a wide variety of genres, like Shigeru Miyamoto.

I think Sid Meier and Will Wright have just as much depth as Shigeru. It's a matter of what they're interested in doing, not capability.

I'd love to do an RPG or an adventure game, for instance, but the cost to make those is beyond what we have the resources for.

Strategy games aren't as content heavy as some other game genres (i.e. aren't as expensive).

Successfully updated karma reason!

here's my two-cents worth: Link
PS: I'm now trying out the campaign and foresee GalCiv2 taking up quite a bit of my time

Successfully updated karma reason!

Aw, you sure know how to tease a girl. Adventure games are my main gaming passion, and I'd love to see what you folks could come up with, especially if it's sci-fi based. Maybe someday...

At any rate, I'm glad to see the game getting good reviews. It is quite good and fun, and your apparent business practice of continued support, no copy protection, and customer interaction is one I'd like to see thrive more.

Peace & Luv, Liz

Successfully updated karma reason!

I don't want new features, I want the game in a better state than it's in right now.

Successfully updated karma reason!

You guys are doing the right thing. In this day and age, word of mouth information travels fast. And people "in general" would value many good "word of mouths" then a canned review.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Agree with Jeysie on that one. A RPG game made by you guys & gals would be the greatest. Specially with the humour and wit. Well keep it in mind maybe.

Re: the reviews linked. The reviewers are entitled to their own opinion, but we don't have to agree with them

Gal Civ 2 is a 10 in my book.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I agree,
I like this game alot.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Of course word of mouth can be powerful. Why do you think SOOOO many people play that crappy little game called counter-strike? or why so many people play world of warcraft?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Regarding the unfortunate lack of "re-reviewing" games that are constantly improving, like GalCiv2 - PC Gamer UK do a regular Long Play feature where writers (staff and freelance) devote several pages to going back over a game that particular writer is still enjoying and re-evaluating it. It can be anything from 6 months to 10 or more years since the game released. The rest of their Extra Life section also tends to cover things like games continuing to be enhanced (rather than standard patching) in the months after release.

Edit: Also worth mentioning that the inclusion of this kind of stuff in the magazine came about as a result of a big content redesign they did over a year ago where the suggestions & opinions of the readers factored into what changes were made. These kind of "after release updates" on games were a regular suggestion they took on board.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Some of the reviews seem do seem a bit harsh, but at least they all acknowledge the brilliance of the game's AI. One of your early fears was that this wouldn't be the case because they were playing on easy levels.

Dano

Successfully updated karma reason!

As for IGN and MOO3 I believe that they re-reviewed the game (I think) once it was determined that there really wasn't anything under the intimidating complexity of the interface.

Dano

Successfully updated karma reason!

The Penny Arcade guy just reviewed the game...sorta. Link What he talks about is getting sucked into obsessive ship design and ignoring the rest of the game. To be honest, I can't tell if that's a good review or not.

Successfully updated karma reason!

8/10 is a fair score for this game, IMO. Now that the enthusiastic early reviews are done with, I think we'll see quite a few 8/10-scores and even some 7/10-scores.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I completely agree with your comments regarding re-reviewing. With the huge number of games that get rushed to market full of bugs and incomplete features, the absence of re-reviewing has to act as a disincentive for developers to fix their games. If their game is canned by reviewers, that's it. Working on the game might improve things for existing customers, but it's too late for new customers basing their purchase decision on reviews.

Of course, it would be better if publishers stopped forcing ppl to release premature bug-riddled steaming piles of crap in the first place, but while reviewers are letting them get away with the idea of "ship first, patch later", the situation will not change.

Example: Civ4. Awesome reviews at launch, but that game was simply unplayable for most ppl due to crippling memory leaks and graphics problems until the first patch.

Successfully updated karma reason!